Alpharius wrote: I apologize in advance for asking a question which has probably already been asked and answered but...
...when is the next official GW report due?
It is soon, isn't it?
And won't that help 'answer' a lot of these questions?
Next week some time based on previous years.
Whether it answers any questions or not depends what it says
If the Knight + 7th Ed blow the doors off* you'll have the pro-no-problem crowd saying everything was a blip and the anti-no-problem crowd saying launching two flagship products just disguises an underlying decline in the business and by-the-way-didn't-the-market-grow-again.
*This being in the range of H2 revenue flat (so down YoY) to YoY being better in total than H1 all the way through to up YoY total.
Anything less than that and you'll get the pro-no-problem crowd saying one year is not a trend and the anti-no-problem crowd saying it proves their point.
To be fair, I don't think there is anyone in this thread claiming GW doesn't have any problems. I'm certainly not disillusioned enough to make a claim that baseless and contradictory to facts. GW has quite a few problems, declining customer base, rising prices preventing new players from filling the spots of those who quit, dwindling market share, and management that seems to forget just how they got all of us hooked in the first place. However, companies have survived worse positions than GW is in right now. 40k is still the number 1 tabletop war game out there and will remain that way for awhile. There are still plenty of places where almost everyone plays 40k/WFB and getting a game of x wing or hordes is nearly impossible. I think if the situation got too dire at GW, they would start dropping prices to turn things around. This could potentially bring a resurgence of new players to the game. Their business model of hiking prices to compensate for a decline in players cannot work forever. When they see this, they will either do something to right the ship or the stockholders will sell off a majority of shares to someone that can.
The syntax of using 'next' in english is VERY confusing, even with native speakers for the exact reason you noted.
in general it is used to mean "after this", but in terms of time/distance it is often hard to tell exactly where the speaker is placing 'this' to begin with.
techsoldaten wrote: Hit 2 of the marks on this list, and people won't be able to get enough. Tabletop models becomes the least profitable business unit in about 6 months and Forgeworld gets spun off into a Norweigan holding company allowing them to keep engaging in their 'core' line of business. Disney is suddenly trying to buy them for $2 billion.
But, from the point of view of their existing customers, is this really any different from going under? Turning the brand into another pile of mass-produced garbage is effectively killing it anyway. Sure, the results for GW's shareholders might be better, but it's not exactly something we should be hoping for.
Ask yourself a couple questions:
1) When did anyone stop making Star Wars figures? I've never noticed a scarcity of these things.
2) From the point of view of customers, is the current direction of GW any better?
techsoldaten wrote: Hit 2 of the marks on this list, and people won't be able to get enough. Tabletop models becomes the least profitable business unit in about 6 months and Forgeworld gets spun off into a Norweigan holding company allowing them to keep engaging in their 'core' line of business. Disney is suddenly trying to buy them for $2 billion.
But, from the point of view of their existing customers, is this really any different from going under? Turning the brand into another pile of mass-produced garbage is effectively killing it anyway. Sure, the results for GW's shareholders might be better, but it's not exactly something we should be hoping for.
Ask yourself a couple questions:
1) When did anyone stop making Star Wars figures? I've never noticed a scarcity of these things.
2) From the point of view of customers, is the current direction of GW any better?
I don't know that star wars vs warhammer is a fair comparison. Lucas probably makes more personally than GW as a company does. Which is a fair indicator of market reach and general ubiquity.
@Toofast.
Unfortunately things do not follow a constant steady rate of decline in business.
Usually there is a tipping point where a business loses critical mass, and sales plummet, and there is nothing the company can do to slow this down in the short term.
Despite GW corporate managers pushing the idea that the majority of GW customers are collectors that do not play GW games.
I would suggest when the active player base drops below a certain size, the critical mass would have been reached and it would be too late for GW plc to turn it around.
Because GW do not have any marketing beyond word of mouth ,(increasingly negative.)And a chain of stores that are now hard sell retail , rather than hobby promotion centers.
I think GW plc need to start addressing the problems the C.E.O highlighted 7 years ago.
(The corporate management had grown fat and lazy on the back of easy success.Yet they continued using the same short term solutions that were not working 7 years ago!)
thetallestgiraffe wrote: I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things.
People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Sooooo, how do you explain the rapidly falling market share?
What is that if not a sign of GW going under?
What, by your definition would be anyway? It sounds like you're trying to say that no one can ever know if a company is going under.
Has Microsoft gone under? They were over $100 a share and now is what, $50 or under $30 a share? Is Apple going under? They were over $700 a share last year. What are they now? 1/2 that? So I guess Apple is going under and we will have no more iPads, iPhones and Macs next year or so.
The key thing is to hold a good load of cash in the bank, in order to invest in a change of direction if their current course has brought the good ship GW close to "th'impervious horrors of a lee shore".
Kilkrazy wrote: I am an example of the knock-on effect. I built up fairly substantial Tau and Tyranid armies in 2004-06 and 2010-2011.
When 6th edition came out I bought the softback rulebook but I didn't buy the new £30 codexes so I haven't bought any of the new models either.
Effectively in their effort to screw an extra £15 out of me for the Tau codex GW threw away the chance to sell me a £50 Riptide and a £40 Sunshark, etc.
And that is why the price is doubled. With the loss of sale they got from you, they got from someone else. 1/2 the sales, double the price, means everything is status quo, with "restructuring" going on, means more profit for the year.
That could be why we have problems with supply and demand now. GW expected less demand so didn't make as much. Maybe that is why 2000 seems to be the sweet spot for GW in Limited Edition books, because that is what the market that is out there right now for it. It seems GW is comfortable with 2000 customers world wide.
Kilkrazy wrote: I am an example of the knock-on effect. I built up fairly substantial Tau and Tyranid armies in 2004-06 and 2010-2011.
When 6th edition came out I bought the softback rulebook but I didn't buy the new £30 codexes so I haven't bought any of the new models either.
Effectively in their effort to screw an extra £15 out of me for the Tau codex GW threw away the chance to sell me a £50 Riptide and a £40 Sunshark, etc.
And that is why the price is doubled. With the loss of sale they got from you, they got from someone else. 1/2 the sales, double the price, means everything is status quo, with "restructuring" going on, means more profit for the year.
That could be why we have problems with supply and demand now. GW expected less demand so didn't make as much. Maybe that is why 2000 seems to be the sweet spot for GW in Limited Edition books, because that is what the market that is out there right now for it. It seems GW is comfortable with 2000 customers world wide.
Pssst. Pssst.
GW had a 30% loss in profits last semestre.
If that is their "strategy", then it doesn't seem to be working so well.
Kilkrazy wrote: I am an example of the knock-on effect. I built up fairly substantial Tau and Tyranid armies in 2004-06 and 2010-2011.
When 6th edition came out I bought the softback rulebook but I didn't buy the new £30 codexes so I haven't bought any of the new models either.
Effectively in their effort to screw an extra £15 out of me for the Tau codex GW threw away the chance to sell me a £50 Riptide and a £40 Sunshark, etc.
And that is why the price is doubled. With the loss of sale they got from you, they got from someone else. 1/2 the sales, double the price, means everything is status quo, with "restructuring" going on, means more profit for the year.
That could be why we have problems with supply and demand now. GW expected less demand so didn't make as much. Maybe that is why 2000 seems to be the sweet spot for GW in Limited Edition books, because that is what the market that is out there right now for it. It seems GW is comfortable with 2000 customers world wide.
I don't know about you, but I've never heard it considered GOOD business to raise the price to make up for lack of customers. I've only taken a Macroeconomics class many years ago and even then we learned about supply, demand and equilibrium. I don't ever recall it being a viable long-term strategy to make the customers staying with you pay extra to pick up the lost revenue for the ones you lost. That's short-term thinking, not long-term.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Its not unusual for restructuring companies to show little to no growth anyway, and GW has certainly been doing that. Restructuring takes effort away from business development activities, and the shock-effect amongst staff can give issues as well.
If in another year there are still issues thats more concerning.
If by restructuring you mean cutting everything they can cut then, yeah, GW has been restructuring.
Seriously, it's more than just cutting. They've restructured their logistics side as well, but don't let facts get in the way of a snarky comment...
Wayne - for what I thought were obvious reasons their profit margin on books isn't the same as other companies. Their logistics being higher is just one of them. But hey, just compare in a vacuum, best way to do so.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Its not unusual for restructuring companies to show little to no growth anyway, and GW has certainly been doing that. Restructuring takes effort away from business development activities, and the shock-effect amongst staff can give issues as well.
If in another year there are still issues thats more concerning.
If by restructuring you mean cutting everything they can cut then, yeah, GW has been restructuring.
Seriously, it's more than just cutting. They've restructured their logistics side as well, but don't let facts get in the way of a snarky comment...
Wayne - for what I thought were obvious reasons their profit margin on books isn't the same as other companies. Their logistics being higher is just one of them. But hey, just compare in a vacuum, best way to do so.
Why is their profit margin on books not the same as, say, Warlord Games or Privateer Press, who also make wargames? Something related to GW's size/volume? I'm not understanding your position.
I look at a GW codex and compare it to its nearest equivalents: Bolt Action's "Armies of..." and Privateer Press's "Forces of..." books, which are roughly the same type of thing (supplement for a specific army) although PP's books are the outlier since they aren't required to play. Bolt Action's books are $25 a piece for softcover + full color. PP's is $35 I think for softcover and had a LE hardcover that is OOP I believe. GW is $50 for hardcover, and before that was somewhere around $30-35 for softcover IIRC. Hardcover alone isn't worth that huge increase, neither is full color as the other books are full color too. The Bolt Action books, in particular, seem to be the same kind of high quality paper.
so now the goal post move again is see, and yes it fantasy flight, wrong brand, pricinpls still holds, they charge more per model then GW, yet no one is whining endlessly about their price gouging...
that you need less models is 100% irrelevant, that they are newer games that have not yet expanded to include true "fleet" sized lists is also irrelevant, not to mention they add things like "super heavies" a la capitol "epic" ships just like GW....
when people complain about prices of GW, and somone bring up that other games are more expensive per model, or comparable in price,
perhaps people want games to play with ARMIES not just a squad or two? ever think of that?
GW isnt forcing us to use armies either, go ahead and play a game with 5 models or less, its totally do able, forge a good narrative and re create some space boarding scenario or something.
its just whiners being whiners
I play lots of games besides 40k, they all have the same issues, but get a free pass because they are underdogs and GW is the big bad wolf or somthing.
easysauce wrote: privateer press charges me 17-19 per model... (star wars atack wing)
GW charges me 10$ on average...
what was that about GW price gouging again?
The argument is and has never been price per model. Stop this ridiculous fallacy.
Compare the game. A normal sized Warmachine army (35 points) costs around $250 or so, barring things like running a colossal/gargantuan. How much can you get out of 40k for $250? What if you had to buy the rules too? Half of that would be gone just for the rules.
Nobody has ever denied that other games are expensive, the difference is that I can get a good sized force for Warmachine for an basic, entry-level 40k army.
Not only that but PP models go further in the context of the game. A squad of Winter Guard might be $50, but it's a big unit and in most cases the only one I need, and represents a big chunk of my force. A squad of Guardsmen is what, $40 now and represents a tiny part of your army?
You don't compare the individual prices, you compare the value that you get. Very few of GW's kits are standalone in that you buy one box and field one unit; it's typically always 2+ and in some cases you need to buy two boxes just to get a single normal-sized unit.
easysauce wrote: so now the goal post move again is see, and yes it fantasy flight, wrong brand, pricinpls still holds, they charge more per model then GW, yet no one is whining endlessly about their price gouging...
Kindly direct me to where I placed the original goal posts? I've always contended the issue with GW isn't one of pure price, it is one of value. Because people can start X Wing for £25, and have a fully functioning collection to tournament level lists with options for approximately the same price as DV and a codex costs means people are willing to overlook the individual model price, because they don't feel like they're being bent over for the privilege of playing the game.
that you need less models is 100% irrelevant, that they are newer games that have not yet expanded to include true "fleet" sized lists is also irrelevant, not to mention they add things like "super heavies" a la capitol "epic" ships just like GW....
Yes, and they do a whole lot better job of doing it. Look at the Capital Ships for X Wing, or the Colossals for Warmachine, I defy you to find a thread on Dakka or anywhere where people are so vehemently pro or anti their inclusion as the current LoW thread here in 40K discussion.
when people complain about prices of GW, and somone bring up that other games are more expensive per model, or comparable in price,
They do, but I'm not one of them, the issue is value, as I've already stated.
perhaps people want games to play with ARMIES not just a squad or two? ever think of that?
Patronising much? Yeah, of course I've thought of that, maybe people want to be able to start a game without a massive buy in cost, ever think of that?
GW isnt forcing us to use armies either, go ahead and play a game with 5 models or less, its totally do able, forge a good narrative and re create some space boarding scenario or something.
Yeah, it is totally doable, you still need nearly £100 in books just to do that, and how much is the d/l of the Kill Team rules?
its just whiners being whiners
Bravo, really original.
I play lots of games besides 40k, they all have the same issues, but get a free pass because they are underdogs and GW is the big bad wolf or somthing.
Me too. No other game has as fractured a player base, degree of dissatisfaction, as flawed a set of rules or issues with balance as 40K. Which is not to say I'm writing it off, I don't think its irredeemable, but if you're playing other games with "the same issues" you're really poor at choosing what games to play.
easysauce wrote: privateer press charges me 17-19 per model... (star wars atack wing)
GW charges me 10$ on average...
what was that about GW price gouging again?
The argument is and has never been price per model. Stop this ridiculous fallacy.
Compare the game. A normal sized Warmachine army (35 points) costs around $250 or so, barring things like running a colossal/gargantuan. How much can you get out of 40k for $250? What if you had to buy the rules too? Half of that would be gone just for the rules.
Nobody has ever denied that other games are expensive, the difference is that I can get a good sized force for Warmachine for an basic, entry-level 40k army.
Not only that but PP models go further in the context of the game. A squad of Winter Guard might be $50, but it's a big unit and in most cases the only one I need, and represents a big chunk of my force. A squad of Guardsmen is what, $40 now and represents a tiny part of your army?
except it has been brought up multiple times that price is the issue,
a "normal" game of 40k can consist of one model... warmachine can consist of more then 35 points.
you can get a perfectly playable army from GW for 250.. in fact I just bought TWO for 150..
you are the one commiting fallacies wiht your "my models are expensive too, but I just buy less of them so its a cheaper hobby!"
because you dont HAVE TO BUY that many models with GW if you do not want to.
there is also the aspect of scale, do you WANT to play with a squad sized list in warmahords? great good for you have fun, thats what WMH's does.
if you want to play with army sized games in WMH, its just as expensive as GW.
GW you can do small, or big, you have a choice.
may as well just complain that guardsmen cost more $ per point then termanators and its GW forcing money out of your wallet... oh wait, you just did.
The thing is even if you compare GW's prices fairly (i.e. plastics to plastics, resin/metal to resin/metal), usually they're still on the more expensive side of things. Hell, even in some cases for the new plastics (SM Librarian is 25 Euros) are MORE expensive than metals of other companies (usual Infinity metal infantry-sized character is 10.25 Euros).
That's more than half. Of course, this does not apply all of GW's offerings, but you can see the insanity of it with that kind of price point. It's not "whiners just whining", it's customers dissatisfied with the prices that are frankly quite ridiculous compared to other companies' prices.
Sternguard Veterans (take note: these are plastics) = 5 for 40 euros (8 Euros each)
A 4 man metal Infinity box = 4 for 27.95 (6.98 Euros each)
Sooo why are the plastics more expensive than metal ones on a model per model basis? If you compare that with plastics from other companies, it becomes more insaaane. Let's take a cheaper box so that people won't say I'm cheating: let's compare GW's Peasant Men-at-Arms on a model per model basis with the plastics of other companies, shall we?
GW Men-at-Arms: 31 Euros for 16 models (5.17 Euros each)
Perry Bows and Bills box: 25.1 Euros for 40 models !!!! (0.63 Euros each)
Fireforge Games Foot Sergeants: 35 Euros for 48 models (0.73 Euros each)
With just a glance, GW models cost more than 5 fething times their competitors. But no, pointing out that paying 5 times the usual amount is just "whiners whining".
And we haven't even touched army size and the money you need to burn in order to buy the books to play the game.
3rd parties making counter feits, and a player base that encourages it.
and have not grown SO huge that the playerbase is just impossible to please...
a 1000000 person player base will never, ever agree, and will always be fragmented to some degree, this is what 40k is, its like getting that many people to agree on the best topping for pizza.
a 1000 person player base a la WMH or other games, is much easier to keep coherant for many reason.
once these other games scale up in player base, and have been around for 20 odd years with the level of content GW provides, if they are still as cheap and streamlined, fine ok you win, its the better "game".
but they are not, lets see if they are even sucessfull enough to reach that point before we go claiming as such.
you are welcome to like any game you want, but constently bashing others for enjoying things they think are fun and worth it is just sad.
Id swear, the first rule of warmahordes is "you must bash 40k"
I dont see 40k players doing that to WMH's or infinity or malifaux, that alone is the main reason why I havnt got into those two systems in particular, if the players of WMH's cant go a whole tournament without repeating ad nausium to me that 40k is a unpolishable turd of a game, despite the # of people there enjoying that "turd game" outnumber themselves, it just speaks to what kind of person the games appeal to i guess.
3rd parties making counter feits, and a player base that encourages it.
and have not grown SO huge that the playerbase is just impossible to please...
a 1000000 person player base will never, ever agree, and will always be fragmented to some degree, this is what 40k is, its like getting that many people to agree on the best topping for pizza.
a 1000 person player base a la WMH or other games, is much easier to keep coherant for many reason.
once these other games scale up in player base, and have been around for 20 odd years with the level of content GW provides, if they are still as cheap and streamlined, fine ok you win, its the better "game".
but they are not, lets see if they are even sucessfull enough to reach that point before we go claiming as such.
you are welcome to like any game you want, but constently bashing others for enjoying things they think are fun and worth it is just sad.
Id swear, the first rule of warmahordes is "you must bash 40k"
Ok, out of those points you make which are based in facts, rather than hyperbole and conjecture, please explain how any of them are my problem as a consumer? If GW are compelled to charge their prices because of a situation of their own making, the they've just made a lot of poor decisions.
3rd parties making counter feits, and a player base that encourages it.
So you're asserting GW's prices are due to making their customers pay for their legal battles? You really are adorable.
and have not grown SO huge that the playerbase is just impossible to please...
GW are really not as big as you like to think they are.
a 1000000 person player base will never, ever agree, and will always be fragmented to some degree, this is what 40k is, its like getting that many people to agree on the best topping for pizza.
Well, duh. Humans are not some kind of hive mind conglomerate.
a 1000 person player base a la WMH or other games, is much easier to keep coherant for many reason.
Now you're just pulling numbers out your backside. If you think WMH has 1000ish players globally then I don't know what to say. Well, I do but it would probably earn me a holiday from Dakka.
Id swear, the first rule of warmahordes is "you must bash 40k"
It's really not. But keep telling yourself that if it makes you able to sleep at night.
easysauce wrote: privateer press charges me 17-19 per model... (star wars atack wing)
GW charges me 10$ on average...
what was that about GW price gouging again?
Then look at the numbers I posted a few posts ago. Wouldn't you say that costing 5-10 times more than the competitor (and I'm not even exaggerating) a tad bit ridiculous in terms of pricing?
The customer doesn't care if you have shops, or counterfeiters, or whatever legal problems you have with 3rd party sources. When I buy bread, I don't care if the bread company is having financial problems due to lack of eggs. And even if I do care, that doesn't warrant a 500%-1000% increase in price. Because that is stupid.
The customer cares about the the value they're getting with the price that they're paying.
Alpharius wrote: I apologize in advance for asking a question which has probably already been asked and answered but...
...when is the next official GW report due?
It is soon, isn't it?
And won't that help 'answer' a lot of these questions?
Next week some time based on previous years.
Whether it answers any questions or not depends what it says
If the Knight + 7th Ed blow the doors off* you'll have the pro-no-problem crowd saying everything was a blip and the anti-no-problem crowd saying launching two flagship products just disguises an underlying decline in the business and by-the-way-didn't-the-market-grow-again.
*This being in the range of H2 revenue flat (so down YoY) to YoY being better in total than H1 all the way through to up YoY total.
Anything less than that and you'll get the pro-no-problem crowd saying one year is not a trend and the anti-no-problem crowd saying it proves their point.
To be fair, I don't think there is anyone in this thread claiming GW doesn't have any problems. I'm certainly not disillusioned enough to make a claim that baseless and contradictory to facts. GW has quite a few problems, declining customer base, rising prices preventing new players from filling the spots of those who quit, dwindling market share, and management that seems to forget just how they got all of us hooked in the first place. However, companies have survived worse positions than GW is in right now. 40k is still the number 1 tabletop war game out there and will remain that way for awhile. There are still plenty of places where almost everyone plays 40k/WFB and getting a game of x wing or hordes is nearly impossible. I think if the situation got too dire at GW, they would start dropping prices to turn things around. This could potentially bring a resurgence of new players to the game. Their business model of hiking prices to compensate for a decline in players cannot work forever. When they see this, they will either do something to right the ship or the stockholders will sell off a majority of shares to someone that can.
Sure, I guess "GW have major problems right now" and "GW have things that could become major problems in the future" might be a better description of the two schools of thought.
When you're a company in distress, dropping prices isn't a magic sponge that fixes everything. Leave it too late and all you do is bankrupt the business quicker.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things.
People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Sooooo, how do you explain the rapidly falling market share?
What is that if not a sign of GW going under?
What, by your definition would be anyway? It sounds like you're trying to say that no one can ever know if a company is going under.
Has Microsoft gone under? They were over $100 a share and now is what, $50 or under $30 a share? Is Apple going under? They were over $700 a share last year. What are they now? 1/2 that? So I guess Apple is going under and we will have no more iPads, iPhones and Macs next year or so.
The poster you quoted said "market share" not "share price".
And? Sticking to a strategy that is no longer viable is neither the customer's fault nor something they're likely to have any interest in paying for.
Or....if a company chooses a path that necessitates prices that make it uncompetitive in the market, the onus is on the company to change it's strategy, whether that be adjusting it's cost base or providing some other value-add service that bridges the value gap in the customer's perception, not just tell the customer to suck it up.
Kilkrazy wrote: Well the base fact is that codexes and army books doubled in price over the past three years.
This means bluntly that unless people are prepared to double their spend on the necessary books, they will buy fewer of them, possibly half as many..
Fewer than half, in at least some cases.
I bought every book that GW published during 2nd ed through to 5th. I bought 3 of the hardcover 6th ed codexes... and that was off eBay rather than new.
And I've encountered quite a lot of people in a similar situation, who went from buying every codex as it was released to only buying the books they actually need for their current armies.
The shops should pay for themselves. If GW normally sells to an indie retailer for 50% of retail (not sure what it actually is) then GW should be able to run their shops on the extra 50% revenue that they otherwise wouldn't have made if the sales had gone to the indie retailer. If the GW stores are unable to survive on that 50% additional revenue then that's GWs problem, not the consumer.
The shops might be a reason, but they're not an excuse.
Baragash wrote: When you're a company in distress, dropping prices isn't a magic sponge that fixes everything. Leave it too late and all you do is bankrupt the business quicker.
Couldn't agree with this statement more. At this point, the rate of customer loss even price drops won't fix. Customers won't magically flock back because GW suddenly comes to their senses. Once the barrier of trust has been broken with existing customers, causing them to go elsewhere, it is very, very hard to ever get them back.
Besides, GW has a lot more problems than just their pricing right now. They have some very serious competition nicking away at their company every month from a variety of companies (though they don't see any), their rules have become an absolute joke versus what their competition is putting out. Finally they have damaged channel relations so much that they are now stuck with this high cost, one man store, retail model.
GW is close to done, and the financials published sometime next week are only going to show how fast that time is going to come. They are obviously in the death spiral and there is no way in heck this management team is going to know how to pull out of it. As it is, it takes an extremely good CEO to save any company deep into the spiral (such as with Apple) and a serious come to reality session (such as with Nintendo) to admit you are going down the wrong path and to completely change course. The issue is, GWs management is far to arrogant and full of hubris to even begin to correct the situation.
Apparently talking about profit margins , which depend on cost of sale, and running shops, which increases your cost of sale, is a difficult connection to make?
Higher cost of sale means you need a higher price to get to the same margin.
nosferatu1001 wrote: Its not unusual for restructuring companies to show little to no growth anyway, and GW has certainly been doing that. Restructuring takes effort away from business development activities, and the shock-effect amongst staff can give issues as well.
If in another year there are still issues thats more concerning.
If by restructuring you mean cutting everything they can cut then, yeah, GW has been restructuring.
Seriously, it's more than just cutting. They've restructured their logistics side as well, but don't let facts get in the way of a snarky comment...
Wayne - for what I thought were obvious reasons their profit margin on books isn't the same as other companies. Their logistics being higher is just one of them. But hey, just compare in a vacuum, best way to do so.
Games Workshop do not produce books by "A Strange Magick", they use Adobe InDesign or Quark Xpress and web offset litho the same as everyone else in the world.
If by "logistics being higher" you mean they only sell through their own loss-making retail outlets, I agree with you.
I fail to see why you and I and everyone else should pay double not to buy GW rulebooks on Amazon.
easysauce wrote: its like hearing call of duty players tell people gaming with minis is stupid,
look how much more balanced my call of duty game is, no gamers inch cheating, no random rolls, pure skill!
pure balance!
much MUCH cheaper then warmahordes too!
why would you play such a crappy game like WMH's when call of duty is OBS superior!
what?
He's saying a computer game is cheaper than any wargame, and more balanced. So his point appears to be that people who want good rules and a non-extortionate startup cost aren't real wargamers at all.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things.
People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Sooooo, how do you explain the rapidly falling market share?
What is that if not a sign of GW going under?
What, by your definition would be anyway? It sounds like you're trying to say that no one can ever know if a company is going under.
Has Microsoft gone under? They were over $100 a share and now is what, $50 or under $30 a share? Is Apple going under? They were over $700 a share last year. What are they now? 1/2 that? So I guess Apple is going under and we will have no more iPads, iPhones and Macs next year or so.
Man, these threads always move so fast when I'm asleep. Makes it hard to keep up.
Anyway the point I was making had nothing to do with share price or stocks. I'm talking market share, as in the percentage of the market GW owns.
Here in Australia that is crumbling. It is now easier for me to get games of Warmachine, x wing, dystopian wars and kings of war than 40k or fantasy. 2nd edition Dystopian Wars of all things outsold 40k 7th ed 7 to 1 through one of our largest online retailers. FLGSs are thriving while GW stores seem to struggle to get people in the door.
Once upon a time GW appeared to have complete and total market share unless you looked at historical games. Now it would seem generous to give them even 50% here in oz. Those aren't hard numbers by any means but you can't argue that they haven't lost a huge amount of market share and that is a very big warning sign, especially if there is nothing to suggest they are growing rather than falling further.
nosferatu1001 wrote: and? your quote snipping again dropped the context, which is that you cannot just compare like for like and say it has doubled in price "because", without including the contributing factors. Or at least those that GW attributed to the price rise.
Try to avoid snipping context out, makes your posts more coherent.
So what? Your assertion was that full-colour hardback was somehow a license to charge higher prices, yet we have examples of companies doing the exact opposite of that. Concede, or find a real reason to justify Codex costs.
nosferatu1001 wrote: and? your quote snipping again dropped the context, which is that you cannot just compare like for like and say it has doubled in price "because", without including the contributing factors. Or at least those that GW attributed to the price rise.
Try to avoid snipping context out, makes your posts more coherent.
So what? Your assertion was that full-colour hardback was somehow a license to charge higher prices, yet we have examples of companies doing the exact opposite of that. Concede, or find a real reason to justify Codex costs.
*shrug* I'm happy to pay £10 more for a higher quality product. In 5th I never bothered buying a codex ,even for my own army. I think that's mainly because of how tattered and worn-looking they ended up becoming. But in 6th I will buy most codexes that interest me, even if I have no desire to collect an army. They're simply nice things to have and to hold, I like spending my hard earned money on nice things
KommissarKarl wrote: *shrug* I'm happy to pay £10 more for a higher quality product. In 5th I never bothered buying a codex ,even for my own army. I think that's mainly because of how tattered and worn-looking they ended up becoming. But in 6th I will buy most codexes that interest me, even if I have no desire to collect an army. They're simply nice things to have and to hold, I like spending my hard earned money on nice things
But it isn't a higher-quality product. The point is that other companies make nice hardcover books that cost less than GW's books. GW's prices are based on an awful combination of "our customers will pay it therefore we charge it" and "we run the company so badly that we need to charge more than everyone else just to make the same profit margin".
nosferatu1001 wrote: and? your quote snipping again dropped the context, which is that you cannot just compare like for like and say it has doubled in price "because", without including the contributing factors. Or at least those that GW attributed to the price rise.
Try to avoid snipping context out, makes your posts more coherent.
So what? Your assertion was that full-colour hardback was somehow a license to charge higher prices, yet we have examples of companies doing the exact opposite of that. Concede, or find a real reason to justify Codex costs.
*shrug* I'm happy to pay £10 more for a higher quality product. In 5th I never bothered buying a codex ,even for my own army. I think that's mainly because of how tattered and worn-looking they ended up becoming. But in 6th I will buy most codexes that interest me, even if I have no desire to collect an army. They're simply nice things to have and to hold, I like spending my hard earned money on nice things
And while there are people like yourself buying product from GW, what incentive is there for them to change?
Look at a codex, it is, in essence, the same format that is produced every year for a variety of children's annuals for barely a quarter of the cost, even factoring the lower circulation and alleged increased development costs (although I doubt this differs significantly from the production of any book of similar size) the figures don't stack up.
But, if people are willing to fork over cash for "nice things" (really, you think codexes are high quality books?) then the cycle will repeat.
I like many others, begrudgingly buy those for my own armies (second hand of possible, at least from a discounter) but, again like many others, I used to habitually buy every book, I think I've still got all my 2ed books somewhere, but that is now a thing of the past.
KommissarKarl wrote: *shrug* I'm happy to pay £10 more for a higher quality product. In 5th I never bothered buying a codex ,even for my own army. I think that's mainly because of how tattered and worn-looking they ended up becoming. But in 6th I will buy most codexes that interest me, even if I have no desire to collect an army. They're simply nice things to have and to hold, I like spending my hard earned money on nice things
But it isn't a higher-quality product. The point is that other companies make nice hardcover books that cost less than GW's books. GW's prices are based on an awful combination of "our customers will pay it therefore we charge it" and "we run the company so badly that we need to charge more than everyone else just to make the same profit margin".
It's not a higher value product *to you*. To me it is. I like the colour and the artwork, and I know I'm not alone in this, there was a lot of positive feedback for the hardback codexes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: (really, you think codexes are high quality books?
You need to cut out this sort of sneering contempt in your posts. You're on a forum where we're all paying stupid money for plastic toy soldiers, as part of a greater hobby community where people spend stupid amount of money on books/cards/props. Yes I think my hard-back codexes are high quality. Mind explaining why you find that notion so offensive?
I'm just surprised that you term codexes as "high quality" when, unless we're talking about the LEs, and then barely, they are distinctly ordinary examples of their medium.
Like I said, 100 page, full colour hard back A4 books are the same format as children's annuals, at least they were when I was a kid.
The Heresy books would be something I'd consider high quality, and while they are still most definitely overpriced, when you consider they're barely more than the cost of two codexes, it isn't them that look poor by reflection.
EDIT
But "sneering contempt?" I like that, props for portraying me as a moustachioed super villain in your head. Have we met?
KommissarKarl wrote: *shrug* I'm happy to pay £10 more for a higher quality product.
Higher quality than what, exactly?
The old codexes. I should say I do have a history of doing this, I bought the 3rd Edition D&D Rulebook simply because it felt like a nice thing to own. It was nice to read the rules in such a nice format.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: Where do you get the idea I find it offensive?
I'm just surprised that you term codexes as "high quality" when, unless we're talking about the LEs, and then barely, they are distinctly ordinary examples of their medium.
Like I said, 100 page, full colour hard back A4 books are the same format as children's annuals, at least they were when I was a kid.
The Heresy books would be something I'd consider high quality, and while they are still most definitely overpriced, when you consider they're barely more than the cost of two codexes, it isn't them that look poor by reflection.
EDIT
But "sneering contempt?" I like that, props for portraying me as a moustachioed super villain in your head. Have we met?
Hardcover is not "high quality". It's a physical medium choice. It barely costs the printing company more on the manufacturing, usually $1-$2 (look up articles on this) extra over the soft covers. I imagine the shipping cost is what can eat into them more so than cost to make.
The color printing also can't increase the cost that much as you see it even in the small sized Malifaux book for $15. There's no way it can eat into the cost that much to justify a full color $15 mini rulebook.
So the quality improvements of hardcover and color printing are just a ruse to justify $20 price increases for minimal cost increase. They were already going to put out that content, they were already going to hire those artists; all the content was already going to be produced. So some MBA thought of the great idea to make dupe the consumer into thinking they were getting something of higher quality just to charge $20 more. Oh, glad to see people are still falling for that!
Now when it comes to actual content, it's gotten objectively worse, more so since the December to Remember event. We have more proofreading mistakes, more oversatured studio pictures of studio paint schemes; less conversions, no Golden Daemons, no painting guides. The layout is degrading along with the fluff losing ground to more and more photos.
And if the new Ork codex is the indicator of 7E, you've lost not only a major chunk of original artwork to more studio photos, but you've also lost one of the most useful sections in the book. It's flat out objectively worse than the previous layouts.
So yes, the quality has dropped profusely in what you pay for with the age-old ruse of putting a bit of polish on that turd. If you fall for it once, then sure, it gets us all. If keep paying for it, then shame on you.
I was genuinely disappointed to see that artwork had been replaced with model pictures.
It may be small, but I loved the art of the characters in the 5th ed IG book. Pask and Bastonne just looked like badasses. To imagine them instead as a generic picture of a tank commander and a generic Cadian sergeant makes me sad.
Blacksails wrote: I was genuinely disappointed to see that artwork had been replaced with model pictures.
It may be small, but I loved the art of the characters in the 5th ed IG book. Pask and Bastonne just looked like badasses. To imagine them instead as a generic picture of a tank commander and a generic Cadian sergeant makes me sad.
Same. I'm glad the Imperial Guard was released before they thought about using model pictures. Hopefully they'll drop them by the time they get round to the next guard dex
Same. I'm glad the Imperial Guard was released before they thought about using model pictures. Hopefully they'll drop them by the time they get round to the next guard dex
Indeed.
Still a shame a lot of fluff was cut from the 6th book. There was nothing about my beloved Mordians.
On the plus side, I just found out there's a novel for about the Iron Guard. Gives me an excuse to check out the local GW.
Same. I'm glad the Imperial Guard was released before they thought about using model pictures. Hopefully they'll drop them by the time they get round to the next guard dex
Indeed.
Still a shame a lot of fluff was cut from the 6th book. There was nothing about my beloved Mordians.
On the plus side, I just found out there's a novel for about the Iron Guard. Gives me an excuse to check out the local GW.
This is why I resent my codex.
Fluff of all the regiments that made up the guard have finally been nearly reduced to nothing.
Cadian Koolaide dosage is being increased each edition.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: I think that people should stop trying to look into the future when they have no clue what's going to happen to GW. Companies don't have horizons more than five years and frankly none of us even know what GW has planned in that time. If GW is going under it shows NO real prospects of doing so at the moment, it is just showing a current lack of growth. This could change very easily due to any number of things.
People need to stop trying to predict more than 5 years into the future as you have no idea what will happen beyond then and it doesn't look like GW is going to collapse right now.
Sooooo, how do you explain the rapidly falling market share?
What is that if not a sign of GW going under?
What, by your definition would be anyway? It sounds like you're trying to say that no one can ever know if a company is going under.
Has Microsoft gone under? They were over $100 a share and now is what, $50 or under $30 a share? Is Apple going under? They were over $700 a share last year. What are they now? 1/2 that? So I guess Apple is going under and we will have no more iPads, iPhones and Macs next year or so.
Man, these threads always move so fast when I'm asleep. Makes it hard to keep up.
Anyway the point I was making had nothing to do with share price or stocks. I'm talking market share, as in the percentage of the market GW owns.
Here in Australia that is crumbling. It is now easier for me to get games of Warmachine, x wing, dystopian wars and kings of war than 40k or fantasy. 2nd edition Dystopian Wars of all things outsold 40k 7th ed 7 to 1 through one of our largest online retailers. FLGSs are thriving while GW stores seem to struggle to get people in the door.
Once upon a time GW appeared to have complete and total market share unless you looked at historical games. Now it would seem generous to give them even 50% here in oz. Those aren't hard numbers by any means but you can't argue that they haven't lost a huge amount of market share and that is a very big warning sign, especially if there is nothing to suggest they are growing rather than falling further.
Ok, I thought you meant share price, and they went down so they must be going out of business. Not sure why I didn't pick up on the Market Share. Having trouble sleeping the last few days, so I guess I read it wrong.
TheKbob wrote: Hardcover is not "high quality". It's a physical medium choice. It barely costs the printing company more on the manufacturing, usually $1-$2 (look up articles on this) extra over the soft covers. I imagine the shipping cost is what can eat into them more so than cost to make.
The color printing also can't increase the cost that much as you see it even in the small sized Malifaux book for $15. There's no way it can eat into the cost that much to justify a full color $15 mini rulebook.
So the quality improvements of hardcover and color printing are just a ruse to justify $20 price increases for minimal cost increase. They were already going to put out that content, they were already going to hire those artists; all the content was already going to be produced. So some MBA thought of the great idea to make dupe the consumer into thinking they were getting something of higher quality just to charge $20 more. Oh, glad to see people are still falling for that!
Now when it comes to actual content, it's gotten objectively worse, more so since the December to Remember event. We have more proofreading mistakes, more oversatured studio pictures of studio paint schemes; less conversions, no Golden Daemons, no painting guides. The layout is degrading along with the fluff losing ground to more and more photos.
And if the new Ork codex is the indicator of 7E, you've lost not only a major chunk of original artwork to more studio photos, but you've also lost one of the most useful sections in the book. It's flat out objectively worse than the previous layouts.
So yes, the quality has dropped profusely in what you pay for with the age-old ruse of putting a bit of polish on that turd. If you fall for it once, then sure, it gets us all. If keep paying for it, then shame on you.
Exalted
I haven't been able to justify a codex purchase since marines and I have thousands of points of orks and guard.
KommissarKarl wrote: It's not a higher value product *to you*. To me it is. I like the colour and the artwork, and I know I'm not alone in this, there was a lot of positive feedback for the hardback codexes.
Are you aware that competing companies sell books with superior quality and more content for lower prices?
Hard cover books have always been seen as higher quality versions of books since paper backs were invented as a cheaper, lower quality option.
However a lot of people actually want a cheaper, lower quality option, and refuse to pay the publisher's asking price for the high quality version. What GW should do is issue hard back codexes and a soft back version that doesn't have the fluff and art, just the rules, for a cheaper price.
The slip case ruleset is another example. There is no doubt that separating the rules, fluff and art is a good thing, partly because it allows people who don't want the fluff and art to buy just the rules and not waste their money. Except GW have not done that.
Kilkrazy wrote: The slip case ruleset is another example. There is no doubt that separating the rules, fluff and art is a good thing, partly because it allows people who don't want the fluff and art to buy just the rules and not waste their money. Except GW have not done that.
The funny thing here is how close GW is to getting it. They've finally realized that people want to have a separate rules-only book, they just won't take that next step of making the starter set rulebook available to buy separately.
And if the new Ork codex is the indicator of 7E, you've lost not only a major chunk of original artwork to more studio photos, but you've also lost one of the most useful sections in the book. It's flat out objectively worse than the previous layouts.
Ah, so you don't actually own and haven't seen the Ork codex, correct?
The new Ork codex is better than the previous one. Not as good as it could/should be, but it's better. Yes, we got annoyed when we heard they were using photos for model rules, but it makes sense in context - all the illustrations are with the fluff, it's more logically laid-out, and easier to find stuff. There are quite a few nice touches, little illustrated bits, and the repro is much better than the previous codex, where the blacks were all filled out.
On grammar/writing, they're both average and could do with better proofing. No-one in the GW studio knows how to use that word "comprises". The covers on the hardbacks aren't great quality, they wear quickly and bend in the heat. But as for "objectively worse", no, that's the standard internet blah, from the Ork news and rumours thread, where people who saw the model entries from White Dwarf were outraged, whereas those who actually bought the codex were, in many case, pleasantly surprised. "Subjectively worse", is of course possible, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
The 3-volume rulebook is objectively worse (no painting tips). But as usual, with GW, people take a glass that's half empty and insist it's completely empty.
There's a reason why the EVE book sold out the day it was released, but you can still buy a copy of the limited edition codex. And there's a reason why I don't regret buying the EVE book one bit, while I wouldn't even consider buying a limited-edition GW book.
Hmm... I've looked over the Comi-Con schedule, and it's interesting to see what games are there:
D&D - Wizards.
BattleTech - Catalyst Games/Topps
X-Wing/Star Wars RPG - Fantasy Flight Games
Warmachine - Privateer Press
They've all got booths, and they're all running demos and intros and previews. Any reason why GW doesn't feel the need to attend the biggest popular culture convention on the planet? Their competition sure as hell thinks its a good idea.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Codex: Space Marines - US$58, 176 pages, full colour hardback.
Only War Core Rulebook - US$59.99, 400 pages, full colour hardback
Deathwatch: The Emperor's Chosen - £27 - 144 pages
All codex's apart from Space Marines - £30 - 104 pages.
Two supplements of closer size seems a rather farer comparison to me.
Only War Core Rulebook - £40 - 400 pages, full colour hardback
Warhammer 40k core rules - £50 - 3 full color hardback book slipcase set 480 pages.
Warmachine Prime mk2 - £40 - 246 pages, full colour hardback
Core rules, again a farer comparison.
GW books seem broadly in line with other competing books to me. Yes, there is a cheaper Warmachine core roles, but that was published a year after the soft cover version, and 7th may well get the same thing as 6th did, with a cheaper version of "The Rules".
I'm not saying that GW stuff is not expensive, just that many of the comparisons are unfair and against non equivalent products.
Kilkrazy wrote: The slip case ruleset is another example. There is no doubt that separating the rules, fluff and art is a good thing, partly because it allows people who don't want the fluff and art to buy just the rules and not waste their money. Except GW have not done that.
The funny thing here is how close GW is to getting it. They've finally realized that people want to have a separate rules-only book, they just won't take that next step of making the starter set rulebook available to buy separately.
They did. In 6th. Just not after the new edition has only been out 2 months...
The 3-volume rulebook is objectively worse (no painting tips). But as usual, with GW, people take a glass that's half empty and insist it's completely empty.
I think that about sums it up. Any anyone who dares to point out there is still some water in the glass is abused as a water lover.
Deathwatch: The Emperor's Chosen - £27 - 144 pages
All codex's apart from Space Marines - £30 - 104 pages.
Two supplements of closer size seems a rather farer comparison to me.
Only War Core Rulebook - £40 - 400 pages, full colour hardback
Warhammer 40k core rules - £50 - 3 full color hardback book slipcase set 480 pages.
Warmachine Prime mk2 - £40 - 246 pages, full colour hardback
Core rules, again a farer comparison.
And this was meant to help the argument that GW books are good value? Remove that picture book from the 40K core rules (and it's just a picture book) leaving you with the rule and fluff book and we've got a better idea. Anyway, I chose the Marine one 'cause it had the highest page count, so I was trying to be generous.
Steve steveson wrote: They did. In 6th. Just not after the new edition has only been out 2 months...
But that's the point. They finally made a separate rulebook (though in hardcover, which we didn't want), but only after everyone had to buy the full 6th edition rulebook if they wanted to play the game. Now with 7th they've split the rulebook into three separate books for fluff/painting/rules, they just need to start selling the rules without the extra stuff bundled with it.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Hmm... I've looked over the Comi-Con schedule, and it's interesting to see what games are there:
D&D - Wizards.
BattleTech - Catalyst Games/Topps
X-Wing/Star Wars RPG - Fantasy Flight Games
Warmachine - Privateer Press
They've all got booths, and they're all running demos and intros and previews. Any reason why GW doesn't feel the need to attend the biggest popular culture convention on the planet? Their competition sure as hell thinks its a good idea.
/sarcasimon
Because GW doesn't have any competition according to them.
Only War Core Rulebook - £40 - 400 pages, full colour hardback
Warhammer 40k core rules - £50 - 3 full color hardback book slipcase set 480 pages.
Warmachine Prime mk2 - £40 - 246 pages, full colour hardback
Core rules, again a farer comparison.
Where are you getting that price for the WM Hardcover? The price is £30 not £40. (or to be more exact £27).
Yes, there is a cheaper Warmachine core roles, but that was published a year after the soft cover version, and 7th may well get the same thing as 6th did, with a cheaper version of "The Rules".
Also, what do you mean by this? Are you talking about the smaller rulebook that comes with the two player starter? Because the softcover rulebook that was released as soon as MK2 hit, already only costs £18 so the smaller rulebook is more for convenience sake rather than any actual savings...
H.B.M.C. wrote: Codex: Space Marines - US$58, 176 pages, full colour hardback.
Only War Core Rulebook - US$59.99, 400 pages, full colour hardback
Deathwatch: The Emperor's Chosen - £27 - 144 pages
All codex's apart from Space Marines - £30 - 104 pages.
Two supplements of closer size seems a rather farer comparison to me.
Only War Core Rulebook - £40 - 400 pages, full colour hardback
Warhammer 40k core rules - £50 - 3 full color hardback book slipcase set 480 pages.
Warmachine Prime mk2 - £40 - 246 pages, full colour hardback
Core rules, again a farer comparison.
GW books seem broadly in line with other competing books to me. Yes, there is a cheaper Warmachine core roles, but that was published a year after the soft cover version, and 7th may well get the same thing as 6th did, with a cheaper version of "The Rules".
I'm not saying that GW stuff is not expensive, just that many of the comparisons are unfair and against non equivalent products.
Kilkrazy wrote: The slip case ruleset is another example. There is no doubt that separating the rules, fluff and art is a good thing, partly because it allows people who don't want the fluff and art to buy just the rules and not waste their money. Except GW have not done that.
The funny thing here is how close GW is to getting it. They've finally realized that people want to have a separate rules-only book, they just won't take that next step of making the starter set rulebook available to buy separately.
They did. In 6th. Just not after the new edition has only been out 2 months...
The 3-volume rulebook is objectively worse (no painting tips). But as usual, with GW, people take a glass that's half empty and insist it's completely empty.
I think that about sums it up. Any anyone who dares to point out there is still some water in the glass is abused as a water lover.
If we are going to talk about core rules, you have to put it truly into perspective of someone new getting into the game. All items quoted are US list prices with hardcovers:
Warhammer 40k - $135 (Yes, $135 because you need the core rules AND at least one codex minimum to play the game).
Warmachine MkII - $45
Infinity - $45 (but you can actually get this down to $0 as the full rules, army lists and model profiles are available for download)
Hell Dorado - $45
Bolt Action - $35 ($60 if you want to buy an army book that isn't really needed to play)
So, not only is GW more expensive on a per book basis, but the overall purchase required just to start the game is over-the-top compared to all their competition.
I bought the physical SW codex because I play them but I have the others to reference when I play against some familiar opponents so I don't have to keep asking to see their book when I have a question. Everyone here likes to pretend there's just no possible way to play without spending $135 on rules and that isn't true.
1. Every GW (where I play 95% of my games) has store copies of every rulebook and has never had a problem with people using them for games
2. You can buy the mini rule book out of storm claw for $30 on ebay
I'm not sure if people aren't aware of these things or if they just like to pretend those options don't exist so they have something else to complain about regarding GW.
Toofast wrote: I bought the physical SW codex because I play them but I have the others to reference when I play against some familiar opponents so I don't have to keep asking to see their book when I have a question. Everyone here likes to pretend there's just no possible way to play without spending $135 on rules and that isn't true.
1. Every GW (where I play 95% of my games) has store copies of every rulebook and has never had a problem with people using them for games
2. You can buy the mini rule book out of storm claw for $30 on ebay
I'm not sure if people aren't aware of these things or if they just like to pretend those options don't exist so they have something else to complain about regarding GW.
Seriously?
I don't think pointing out you can pirate the books is justification for saying they aren't expensive. I could steal a Ferrari too, it must not be that expensive...
Nor is saying eBay as we are comparing retail. Those things you mention are being ignored because they are irrelevant.
KommissarKarl wrote: It's not a higher value product *to you*. To me it is. I like the colour and the artwork, and I know I'm not alone in this, there was a lot of positive feedback for the hardback codexes.
Are you aware that competing companies sell books with superior quality and more content for lower prices?
Or do you just not care?
SInce I don't play those other games, they could be free and I still wouldn't care.
Also I'd wait for an actual review of the two before agreeing with you on that. Everything in an anti-gw thread is better and cheaper than GW, despite nonsense "evidence" to the contrary
KommissarKarl wrote: It's not a higher value product *to you*. To me it is. I like the colour and the artwork, and I know I'm not alone in this, there was a lot of positive feedback for the hardback codexes.
Are you aware that competing companies sell books with superior quality and more content for lower prices?
Or do you just not care?
SInce I don't play those other games, they could be free and I still wouldn't care.
Also I'd wait for an actual review of the two before agreeing with you on that. Everything in an anti-gw thread is better and cheaper than GW, despite nonsense "evidence" to the contrary
If by "nonsense evidence to the contrary" you mean incorrect comparisons (e.g. comparing price per model rather than price to play at X size) then sure.
KommissarKarl wrote: It's not a higher value product *to you*. To me it is. I like the colour and the artwork, and I know I'm not alone in this, there was a lot of positive feedback for the hardback codexes.
Are you aware that competing companies sell books with superior quality and more content for lower prices?
Or do you just not care?
SInce I don't play those other games, they could be free and I still wouldn't care.
Also I'd wait for an actual review of the two before agreeing with you on that. Everything in an anti-gw thread is better and cheaper than GW, despite nonsense "evidence" to the contrary
If by "nonsense evidence to the contrary" you mean incorrect comparisons (e.g. comparing price per model rather than price to play at X size) then sure.
That's not what botheres me, since I rarely see "40k costs a LOT more than its competitors, because it's battles are a LOT bigger". I just see "40k costs a LOT more than its competitors."
KommissarKarl wrote: It's not a higher value product *to you*. To me it is. I like the colour and the artwork, and I know I'm not alone in this, there was a lot of positive feedback for the hardback codexes.
Are you aware that competing companies sell books with superior quality and more content for lower prices?
Or do you just not care?
SInce I don't play those other games, they could be free and I still wouldn't care.
Also I'd wait for an actual review of the two before agreeing with you on that. Everything in an anti-gw thread is better and cheaper than GW, despite nonsense "evidence" to the contrary
If by "nonsense evidence to the contrary" you mean incorrect comparisons (e.g. comparing price per model rather than price to play at X size) then sure.
That's not what botheres me, since I rarely see "40k costs a LOT more than its competitors, because it's battles are a LOT bigger". I just see "40k costs a LOT more than its competitors."
It's battles are bigger only in model count. The actual unit count (as in how many models which act independently of other models) is often the same or, in some cases, less.
Add in the fact that the rules are really badly designed for having that many models and... well...
Kilkrazy wrote: The slip case ruleset is another example. There is no doubt that separating the rules, fluff and art is a good thing, partly because it allows people who don't want the fluff and art to buy just the rules and not waste their money. Except GW have not done that.
The funny thing here is how close GW is to getting it. They've finally realized that people want to have a separate rules-only book, they just won't take that next step of making the starter set rulebook available to buy separately.
I know! I was really surprised that they did not offer the slip-case as the special edition and the same rules-only book for say £20 as a stand-alone item.
I actually thought that was the idea of splitting it into three sections. Largely because it is something I have been requesting since 5th edition, and because in 6th edition they brought out the hardback rules only book, that I would have bought if I hadn't already got the softback one and/or if it had been less expensive.
I presume GW were worried that most people would buy the cheaper book if available rather than the complete set.
As a model selling company it is a bit strange they don't want the game rules to be as accessible as possible.
Kilkrazy wrote: I presume GW were worried that most people would buy the cheaper book if available rather than the complete set.
Given most of their past decisions this is likely exactly the reasoning: Can't sell it standalone, because people would buy that and not the full rulebook, so you aren't selling it for as much as you should.
I can only assume that, like most everything else with GW, they figure that people will go out of their way to find the rules (at the local GW store ...) if they want to play games with their collection, otherwise they'll be happy to just build up huge armies that I guess sit there on display? Not 100% sure what they really think people do with the figures.
They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
To answer the original question - No. They aren't going under.
Are some of their business practises questionable? Yeah.
Are their pricing and evident money spinning strategies spoiling what could be an excellent franchise? Sure.
Are a lot of GW customers and critics disillusioned by the direction the business is headed? Definitely.
But is the business tanking it? I really doubt it.
The support is too strong and too many people play warhammer for the company to start failing. The market might shift less from kids towards young adults.
In my local GW which is considered a "1st company store" i.e. best in terms on takings, there has been a noticable shift. Young kids aren't able to afford on their pocket money, but there's a increased and sizable following of 18-30 years olds, possibly because there aren't crowds of annoying brats and the hobby a little more "mature". But yeah, I know my anecdotal experience can't be considered representative by any means.
Tigurius wrote: To answer the original question - No. They aren't going under.
Are some of their business practises questionable? Yeah.
Are their pricing and evident money spinning strategies spoiling what could be an excellent franchise? Sure.
Are a lot of GW customers and critics disillusioned by the direction the business is headed? Definitely.
But is the business tanking it? I really doubt it.
The support is too strong and too many people play warhammer for the company to start failing. The market might shift less from kids towards young adults.
In my local GW which is considered a "1st company store" i.e. best in terms on takings, there has been a noticable shift. Young kids aren't able to afford on their pocket money, but there's a increased and sizable following of 18-30 years olds, possibly because there aren't crowds of annoying brats and the hobby a little more "mature". But yeah, I know my anecdotal experience can't be considered representative by any means.
The same was said about TSR just a year before they were out of business. Next week, when the financials are published, we'll see just how healthy GW really is.
All of GWs practices lead to an ultimate tipping point in business. Once this point is crossed, it is like walking off a cliff and things tend to go down relatively quickly from there. Unless they recover from a double-digit decline in sales and even greater decline in profits in this next period, most are going to be surprised just how fast their business will unravel.
Whilst I agree tipping points are probably closer than a business like GW should be anywhere near reaching, I don't think your analogy to TSR is quite right.
GW is a bigger business with actual stores, I can't see it happening, certainly not in the way that they shut shop.
Toofast wrote: I bought the physical SW codex because I play them but I have the others to reference when I play against some familiar opponents so I don't have to keep asking to see their book when I have a question. Everyone here likes to pretend there's just no possible way to play without spending $135 on rules and that isn't true.
1. Every GW (where I play 95% of my games) has store copies of every rulebook and has never had a problem with people using them for games
2. You can buy the mini rule book out of storm claw for $30 on ebay
I'm not sure if people aren't aware of these things or if they just like to pretend those options don't exist so they have something else to complain about regarding GW.
Seriously?
I don't think pointing out you can pirate the books is justification for saying they aren't expensive. I could steal a Ferrari too, it must not be that expensive...
Nor is saying eBay as we are comparing retail. Those things you mention are being ignored because they are irrelevant.
Edited the quote too
You lost me when you compared downloading a pdf to grand theft auto. You guys are comparing retail of one brand to another. I was simply making the point that it is not necessary to spend $135 on rules just to play the game.
Currently the main rulebook is $85 with no other primary options for purchase. Eventually I'm sure they will release an eBook version of 7th that will have a discount (I believe this was the case with 6th) and that will provide another avenue to get the book cheaper, but at this moment if a new player wanted to start Space Marines from scratch (and are buying retail since they are brand new), the rule would cost at minimum:
- 7th Edition Main Rulebook: $85 (no digital version yet)
- Space Marine: $58 (not $50 because they're the cash cow man! Reap that money! Also the digital version is $1.99 more than hardback)
So that's $143 right away with no models. Now, with secondary sources (i.e. third party, eBay), you would see a discount in these books, but that applies to *any* gaming products you buy from these sources (i.e. the Warmachine MkII rulebook will be cheaper here than it is from PP as well), so I don't really consider that much of a detractor from cost of investment comparisons.
With the release of Sanctus Reach and DV, the price of second-hand mini-7th's should be reasonable, so that will make things more tenable. If you're able to get the mini rulebook for, let's say, $30 off ebay and the Space Marine book for $40, then your total expenditure on rules-only is more like $70. But it's not like someone didn't have to buy the Space Marine book at $58 in the first place, so GW is still getting a good share at such a high price for the book.
@Toofast: the only option you provided I would agree with is the Stormclaw option- however, since this boxset is now sold so its supply of mini-rulebooks to the market is limited. However, DV should be able to supply this gap.
Option 1 is no better or different than any other FLGS offering rules for reference for any other game. Plus I feel saying that the local GW manager is completely cool with you not buying the rules and just borrowing his copy is a bit disingenuous. The Option 3 you originally supplied was literally theft, and again applies to all games across the board.
KommissarKarl wrote: They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.
KommissarKarl wrote: They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.
and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.
KommissarKarl wrote: They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.
and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.
And here we, again, at the point where people have to point out that what other companies with completely different business models do or don't do is completely irrelevant when we are discussing miniature wargaming companies.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you've got nothing more than sniping at people (and posting pictures of receipts?) rather than what the people are saying Oblivion, kindly go away.
Sorry to bring the facts into the discussion. Upsetting to some people, obviously.
Understood, in a perfect world businesses would sell us everything at the price we want. GW publish in hardback first, and however much it upsets you, that's not a uniquely evil practice.
personally, we bought the hardback, and flogged it off on eBay for what we paid when Stormclaw came out. You don't have tp spend loads on 40k if you don't want to.
Anyways, once again this topic has deteriorated, away from the subject. Just because a company annoys you doesn't mean it's going to go bust.
H.B.M.C. wrote: If you've got nothing more than sniping at people (and posting pictures of receipts?) rather than what the people are saying Oblivion, kindly go away.
Sorry to bring the facts into the discussion. Upsetting to some people, obviously.
Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.
I'm pretty sure everything I said was "facts," as are a number of other comments in this thread, both for and against. I would advise against claiming the banner of veracity too hard.
And if the new Ork codex is the indicator of 7E, you've lost not only a major chunk of original artwork to more studio photos, but you've also lost one of the most useful sections in the book. It's flat out objectively worse than the previous layouts.
Ah, so you don't actually own and haven't seen the Ork codex, correct?
The new Ork codex is better than the previous one. Not as good as it could/should be, but it's better. Yes, we got annoyed when we heard they were using photos for model rules, but it makes sense in context - all the illustrations are with the fluff, it's more logically laid-out, and easier to find stuff. There are quite a few nice touches, little illustrated bits, and the repro is much better than the previous codex, where the blacks were all filled out.
So the three editions out of date, 6 year old book isn't as good as the new one? Well, colour me surprised.
What about the fact that the current one isn't considered as good as books that have been produced this year? Personally, I couldn't give a gak about the photos over artwork, I've long since stopped regarding the codexes as anything other than rules supplements (a consequence of recycling substantial amounts of fluff and art every edition is that it massively devalues repeat purchase from those who have no use for the gaming part) but the omission of the fold out summary at the back, which was a genuine step forward in terms of the utility of the book from a gaming point of view, is a real step back over the 6th Ed books.
KommissarKarl wrote: They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.
and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.
I must have missed the release of all those paperback codexes?
Oh, and the release of a paperback core book that didn't require the purchase of a bunch of models I don't want?
I did genuinely miss the limited edition, cheaper, smaller format, hardback rulebook for 6th. Because it was, well, limited. Hindsight shows I dodged a bullet on that though I guess.
Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.
What evidence did you actually provide again?
Same as the way people get really angry about GW for everyday business practices, they seem to imagine people calling them "whiners" .
Again, and we're getting distracted, it's a demonstrable fact that publishing a hardback first is the convention in publishing. Do i like it? No. Do I get outraged? Strangely, no.
So the three editions out of date, 6 year old book isn't as good as the new one? Well, colour me surprised.
.
Sure. But I was responding to a post that asserted the new codex was "objectively worse" than the previous one. It's demonstrably not. Could it be better? Yes, it could and it should.
Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.
What evidence did you actually provide again?
Same as the way people get really angry about GW for everyday business practices, they seem to imagine people calling them "whiners" .
Again, and we're getting distracted, it's a demonstrable fact that publishing a hardback first is the convention in publishing. Do i like it? No. Do I get outraged? Strangely, no.
Name someone else who did this? IIRC Privateer put both out, and the *hardback* was LE while the softcover was the normal one. Okay, I guess Bolt Action's rulebook is only hardcover, but it's also $35 and has basic army lists for the major factions so you don't need the Army book (what a novel idea! Provide all the rules to play in one book?!). Again, GW is the outlier. Only hardcover, charge an arm and a leg for it and rarely if ever put out a softcover despite the fact that more people would buy it.
Except they aren't really facts, you've cited nothing backing up your claims and just dismiss anyone who thinks GW is going down (who, by the way, DO provide evidence) as whiners.
What evidence did you actually provide again?
Same as the way people get really angry about GW for everyday business practices, they seem to imagine people calling them "whiners" .
Again, and we're getting distracted, it's a demonstrable fact that publishing a hardback first is the convention in publishing. Do i like it? No. Do I get outraged? Strangely, no.
Name someone else who did this? IIRC Privateer put both out, and the *hardback* was LE while the softcover was the normal one. Okay, I guess Bolt Action's rulebook is only hardcover, but it's also $35 and has basic army lists for the major factions so you don't need the Army book (what a novel idea! Provide all the rules to play in one book?!). Again, GW is the outlier. Only hardcover, charge an arm and a leg for it and rarely if ever put out a softcover despite the fact that more people would buy it.
I got the Bolt Action Core Rulebook for ~£2 as a digital download from Amazon, I got the Infinity rules for free, and I got the X Wing rulebook alongside everything else I needed to play a game for less than the cost of a codex.
The fact is game companies want you to have easy access to their rules, in the hope that the prospect of playing will excite you enough to buy in. Only Games Workshop seem to think that you should need to invest heavily in books just to see if you like the idea of playing or not. Also, before anyone weighs in with "but you can get a demo game in a GW store for free" as a counter, this is a very limited, biased and, IMO, inadequate alternative, for geographical, impartiality and superficiality reasons.
Actually, if we did a new thread it should be titled, "Do you really hope GW is going to stay afloat despite evidence to the contrary?"
I am no longer emotionally tied to GW at all. Over 20 years of stuff is gone. My interest in GW strictly lies in a business perspective. They are showing all the signs and trends of a company in the later stages of the death spiral. The next financial report is only going to indicate how far down they are in it.
Strictly from a business perspective, to experience a double digit decline in revenue without a significant event where it was expected (such as the bursting of the LOTR-SBG bubble) is a clear sign of a company in serious distress (and thus why a 25% stock price decline on that day). This time there is no planned decline from an artificial product inflation unless we all want to say it is the 40k bubble popping this time.
and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.
That's a model for publishers for novels and stories, never seen it with school books or technical books.
And it should not be used for rulebooks. GW should release a softcover and hardcover both.
It spiked just before the qualification date, then has been steadily settling back down again since the dividend was paid.
Not unique to GW, lots of people will pick up some shares to get the dividend, then try and offload the shares at a profit/break even, easy money if you have the capital and can afford to be stuck with shares that are below what you paid for them until the price recovers (assuming it does.)
That's a model for publishers for novels and stories, never seen it with school books or technical books.
And it should not be used for rulebooks. GW should release a softcover and hardcover both.
The only gaming books I can think of besides GW joints are RPGs. The difference being that those ARE the product. You don't really need to buy anything beyond the initial books.
It's a really disingenuous move for that poster to call it "the standard" when they are comparing novels to gaming rules.
KommissarKarl wrote: They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
Isn't that what happened in 4th edition? Most people waited for Battle of Macragge to come out and get the small paper back version instead of buying the BRB. Then when 5th edition came out, they released the BRB first because they knew people just waited for Blackreach when it came out.
GW gave people what they wanted in 7th. A rule book they don't have to LUG around and be so bulky and heavy. People still complain.
KommissarKarl wrote: They want the rules to be as accessable as possible, just not at a price that most people would want to pay I think if they released a small paperback edition of the news at the same time as the big rulebook, not many people would buy the big rulebook. Or at least, significantly less.
Which a smart company would take as a sign people don't want a hardcover book that costs more.
and here we are, with our circular thread, back at the point where it has to be pointed out that the majority of publishers across the world publish a (pricier) hardback first, and a cheaper paperback later. So even if GW are evil, they're hardly uniquely evil.
Bolded the part you overlooked. GW don't do that. They released a mini 6th edition hardback which was still quite expensive and it doesn't look like 7th is getting a mini rulebook at all considering the new Dark Vengeance has the normal rulebook from the 3 set in it.
I have to buy Dark Vengeance for $110 to get a small rule book which is easily portable and a bunch of models I may not want.
OR
I have to buy the core rules for $85 which includes 2 books I don't need to play the game.
AND
I have to spend $50 on a Codex.
That is minimum of $135 unless I go via some covert route like eBay. I cannot impulse buy the rules for an army for less than $135.
I can impulse buy Warmachine for $75 ($30+$35), but I really only need the core rulebook. All the unit information is displayed on the card that comes with the model.
I can impulse buy X-wing for $40 and again additional rules come with the models.
Davor wrote: GW gave people what they wanted in 7th. A rule book they don't have to LUG around and be so bulky and heavy. People still complain.
Because they didn't give people what they've been asking for, for 3 previous editions now.
The 7th ed rulebook is more convenient to carry around than the 6th ed one was, sure. But you still have to buy the whole 3-book set to get it, and it's more expensive than 6th ed was.
What people wanted was a cheaper softcover alternative. Not a more expensive differently-formatted hardcover.
insaniak wrote: The 7th ed rulebook is more convenient to carry around than the 6th ed one was, sure. But you still have to buy the whole 3-book set to get it, and it's more expensive than 6th ed was.
What people wanted was a cheaper softcover alternative. Not a more expensive differently-formatted hardcover.
Exactly. I already bought the 6th edition rulebook, I don't need another copy of the fluff and model pictures. And I shouldn't have to ebay a copy of the starter set rulebook to get what I want.
Davor wrote: GW gave people what they wanted in 7th. A rule book they don't have to LUG around and be so bulky and heavy. People still complain.
Because they didn't give people what they've been asking for, for 3 previous editions now.
The 7th ed rulebook is more convenient to carry around than the 6th ed one was, sure. But you still have to buy the whole 3-book set to get it, and it's more expensive than 6th ed was.
What people wanted was a cheaper softcover alternative. Not a more expensive differently-formatted hardcover.
Not to mention the little, tiny, completely unimportant bit where people have been asking for balanced rules!
Is 7th edition balanced?
Not from anything that I have seen or heard.
Is 7th what people have been asking for?
No.
Do I think that GW is 'going under'?
Yes, but slowly, and they might yet pull out of the spiral - but I have seen no sign of them taking the steps needed to do so.
They are drowning, and their management has thrown them an anchor.
I do not at this time think that GW is going under. I do feel that they are going to lose money and be forced to listen to someone who actually plays the game and take a good hard listen to some serious feed back. If they do not do that then I believe they will go under. For the time being they are treading water and starting to lose energy.
Here is some more anecdotal evidence. I travel a lot for work and frequent the same 6-7 cities 2-3 times a year. I have the two flgs in my home town and 1 (one just closed) in my city of residence.
Over the past few years since sixth came about the average game day in the larger cities has been steadily shrinking for 6-8 games going at a time to 2-3. That is pretty much every city I frequent. Not to mention local tournaments would be full at 20-30 players now I am seeing them canceled because they can't get more than 10.
Back in fifth you would be hard pressed to find any other game being played aside from fantasy/LOTR(which are all but dead in most of the shops). Now on any given 40k day all the now empty tables are being occupied by warmahordes, x-win, malifaux, FoW, and a few others I am not familiar with.
What is the big difference between these companies and GW? In my observation it is online presence and social media to an extent. Many of these companies have actual forums and you can see actual staff respond to people, accept criticism and respect the feedback good or bad.
PP is doing an amazing job. When I wanted to try the game out I was able to have a press ganger (an ambassador to the game sanctioned by PP) meet me with a few armies and play a few games and give me a great rundown. They even gave me free swag, set of dice and a solo for the faction I wanted to play. I was instantly sold and purchased an army and ended up taking a used army off someones hand.
PP has actual tournaments streamed on twitch, I have watched x-wing streamed online and other games but I cannot find any representation of GW products via any venue other than blogs.
GW needs to get their heads out of the sand and do things like these other companies. I have no issue with the cost of the models if the rules are tight and properly balanced.
If they don't bring themselves into the 21st century then they will be in trouble. People will only hold on so long and with the mass media available to take the interest away people will go elsewhere.
Bullockist wrote: In all honesty PPs' practices are very similar to GW 20 years ago.
Coincidentally the mid to late 90's was GW's best period in terms of creativity, quality and generally goodness.
I think that the very best outcome on Tuesday is that the financial report is dire, but not fatal, forcing a complete management change and a root and branch restructuring of the entire company into something more fit for the internet age. I can see no other way that GW will retain its position in the wargaming market.
I think pretending social media doesn't exist has been their biggest mistake. However, when you constantly make decisions that only get you flamed endlessly on social media, it's hard to keep it going. You end up getting more bad publicity than good from it. First, they would have to stop doing things that get them blasted on social media. Then they can engage the community again through venues like facebook. Whether that will ever happen is anyone's guess, but given GW's history of pretending they live in a vacuum, I would bet against it. GW badly needs to return to what made them great in the first place. I just hope they're willing and able to do so instead of continuing to fight lost revenue with strategies that only drive more customers into the open arms of the competition in the long run.
Toofast wrote: I think pretending social media doesn't exist has been their biggest mistake.
I agree. The lack of engagement with social media is arguably far more of an Achilles heel than the pricing. Closing the discussion boards is one thing - others have done similar, because you're paying to support trolls (or justified criticism, depending on your viewpoint). But closing the Facebook pages, where you could book games at Warhammer World... why?
Then there's the website, which was a good source of vibes, with bits of fluff. They've eliminated almost everything that gave it some flavour and turned it into an e-commerce site. Given that a lot of their sales are direct-only, I can only see it losing them business. There is no business rationale for the stie redesign that I can see. All it will do is reduce browsing, and consequent impulse purchases.
The point about the site is an interesting one that many don't think about due to the other, more obvious issues with the way GW has been doing business lately. I couldn't agree with you more there. I remember the days when I would spend hours browsing painting and modeling tutorials on the GW site and reading their forums. Now, I go there to order stuff, check out new releases, or show my friends how insanely priced some of the boxed sets are ($2,600 orks for example). I guess GW's logic is that any painting or modeling tips that are posted for free on the site can't be put into a $4 weekly WD. If you want those, now you have to pay. I think it would be more profitable to keep those on the site and try to gain revenue from browsing and impulse purchases as you stated but what do I know about war gaming? I'm just a player, not an accountant.
Dakka painting forums and gallery are amazing resources, I couldn't give a feth about GW cutting that stuff from their site tbh ; p It would be a nice service (and virtually free to provide) but waaaay down the list of complaints given fans do that stuff better.
Toofast wrote: The point about the site is an interesting one that many don't think about due to the other, more obvious issues with the way GW has been doing business lately. I couldn't agree with you more there. I remember the days when I would spend hours browsing painting and modeling tutorials on the GW site and reading their forums. Now, I go there to order stuff, check out new releases, or show my friends how insanely priced some of the boxed sets are ($2,600 orks for example). I guess GW's logic is that any painting or modeling tips that are posted for free on the site can't be put into a $4 weekly WD. If you want those, now you have to pay. I think it would be more profitable to keep those on the site and try to gain revenue from browsing and impulse purchases as you stated but what do I know about war gaming? I'm just a player, not an accountant.
Ouze wrote: I'm not an economist, and can't give an expert opinion, but in my lay opinion, GWS business practices as of late do not seem sustainable.
Partially agreed.
From a practical standpoint, they need to figure out how to attract more customers without alienating their current customer base. But they can only sustain crazy release schedules and forcing players to invest hundreds of dollars every several months to remain competitive for only so long.
I have hope that boxed deals that have come out recently are a thing going forward because that is a good idea to attract more fans and retain the ones still invested in playing.
The Stores I've been to this week (3) had stock of Stormclaw in store.
As for GW going under , I can't see it in the short to medium term. The indicator you all want to be looking for is GW closing large numbers of stores in one go.
Perhaps "going under" is the wrong term to use. I mean, they have cash reserves so it's unlikely that they'll just close up shop. The question should rather be if they can sustain themselves, to which I think the answer long-term is definitely "NO".
Their business model is not sustainable. They might be able to coast along for a while without danger, but if you are losing customers and not attracting new ones, eventually you're going to hit a point where the customers you have left can't support your expenses, and THEN you start depleting your cash reserves to make ends meet, and it's just downward from there.
That day is coming unless GW changes their business plan and operations; it might not be "soon" but it's definitely on the horizon, because increasing prices to make up for customers leaving is a ridiculous idea, and one that will eventually piss off the customers you have left.
Well, i think that a significant indicator is the proliferation of tabletop miniature games.
I started playing in 3rd Edition, back in the days of the Big Black Book. At my FLGS, I only remember 40k and Fantasy being played. So, that would put it somewhere between 1998 and 2000, I'd say.
When I was in Tennessee to work on my first Master's (2007 to 2009), 40k and Fantasy were played at my FLGS, but so was Warmachine and Flames of War. In fact, I think I recall more Warmachine tournies than 40k/Fantasy tournies. We did have Press Gangers in the crowd that went to my FLGS, though.
Now, my FLGS up here in Connecticut has more Warmachine games on a regular basis than 40k/Fantasy games.
So, judging by my anecdotal evidence, the market share that Games Workshop has enjoyed for several decades is being eroded. They're still the 800 pound gorilla in the room, but Privateer Press is looking like a 600 pound gorilla who is eating a *whole* bunch of protein and lifting weights all day.
Privateer Press trade at a turnover of circa $15M per year (reported at a convention).
GW turned over £136M in YR to 2013 (up from 2012) that's circa $230M (as reported).
Your gorilla may be smaller that you thought.
GW may well contract in the current year but it has a huge way to go before they are in true competition with any other single miniatures game company.
notprop wrote: Privateer Press trade at a turnover of circa $15M per year (reported at a convention).
That is a fallacy that has of yet to be even remotely confirmed by anyone. I follow PP since 2003, I listened to every one of their announcements in every convention that they made, they've never even mentioned anything remotely close to what their business volume is.
GW may well contract in the current year but it has a huge way to go before they are in true competition with any other single miniatures game company.
There never will be another company that will be as big as GW was/is. What there will be is a continuation of the thriving ecosystem of wargames that have sprung up over the last 5 years. The internet will ensure that GW's near monopoly will not be replicated and that can only be a good thing. Its entirely possible that the combined revenues of all the other fantasy and Sci Fi war games producers already eclipse GW and I would be very surprised if the historicals market isn't significantly bigger.
And I would be very surprised if that was the case, but that's not the question is it?
Keep an eye on property and retail. GWs turnover is dependent on their retail stores, any great shake up in these sectors will overly effect GW but not anytime soon I would suggest.
notprop wrote: And I would be very surprised if that was the case, but that's not the question is it?
Keep an eye on property and retail. GWs turnover is dependent on their retail stores, any great shake up in these sectors will overly effect GW but not anytime soon I would suggest.
GWs turnover is dependent on their retail stores in the UK and the UK only represents 23% of GW's total revenue.
What I would really like to know is how much of the 70+m pounds in operating expenses correspond to the running of their retail arm.
Close all GW shops and I bet that suddenly its profits would skyrocket again.
No its not, but GW's position as the biggest fish in the wargaming pond is no longer relevant given that there is a multitude of vibrant and thriving competition. One of GW's big draws was the ease with which you could get pick up games, today though clubs have diversified massively to the extent that you are now no longer guaranteed (in so far as you can guarantee) a GW pick up game, that is something that I never saw, or even thought possible, until a few years ago.
GW's retail arm will soon be a millstone round its neck, if it isn't already, which all its competitors are completely unaffected by.
God damn though, I think I myself have been pulled into this whole market place thing a bit too much myself. Games workshop IS NOT GOING UNDER ANY TIME SOON, IT IS A HOBBY STORE AND PEOPLE STILL READILY BUY THEIR STUFF. It's reliant on the community wanting to continue the hobby, and the only statistics that matter are sales in individual stores.
It's demise will only come once people become disinterested in their products. There is only one variable that they have to look at; did the store make a profit? Yes? Then it will continue. It failed to? Then the store will close and business will be directed either online or to another store, once again making them profitable.
Their stocks can do loops for all anyone cares but if they make profits they will continue to produce. It is the only variable other than the world supply of plastic running out. And the thing is with all these people talking about Warmachine and what not, no one knows what the hell it is before they know warhammer. It's become the coca cola of board gaming. I know that it was the first game I knew about when and Tbh the other may be good, but I've put so much effort into warhammer that it would be a waste of time and money for me to start another game when this takes up my hobby time already.
A better question would be "do you think that GW is loosing public interest?"
I have to admit I find GW's reliance on brick and mortar stores to be quite... obsolete. I get that that's how they built their reputation/market but the GW store has only ever really been a UK thing. There are very few in the USA and elsewhere, so it seems kind of odd that they still push it as being the be all, end all, nexus of the hobby when it's a very small fraction and a lot of overhead.
The fact they even bothered to have it outside of the UK is confusing as well.
Wargaming is a social experience and it helps a lot for new recruits to be shown how to choose and paint armies, build terrain, actually work through a game, and so on.
Thus face to face spaces -- B&M shops -- are a valuable marketing tool as well as being a place where people can buy things.
The concept of the FLGS is alive and well in the USA and forms a mainstay of the hobby community by all accounts.
GW's difficulty is they don't like GW products to appear alongside competing products but they cannot put the number of shops across the USA that would be needed to replace them, but again they apparently have decided to try and feth over their former independent FLGS sales partners and do it all online by themselves.
This has had a short term effect of improving their profits but in the long term it is not likely to help their sales as recruitment of new players will fall.
Past of the reason for the GW retail chain is legacy. GW used to be a major retailer of RPG and tabletop games. Over the decades it gradually became a retailer of GW games, then a retailer of Warhammer games (including Epic, Blood Bowl and so on) and now it has become a retailer of only WHFB and 40K. I think this is a mistake and they make more use of their retail chain by stocking a wider variety of products.
notprop wrote: Privateer Press trade at a turnover of circa $15M per year (reported at a convention).
GW turned over £136M in YR to 2013 (up from 2012) that's circa $230M (as reported).
Your gorilla may be smaller that you thought.
GW may well contract in the current year but it has a huge way to go before they are in true competition with any other single miniatures game company.
I don't think there will ever be a single miniatures company the size of GW again. However, I think GW's revenues will end up being split by a lot of companies instead. We are more likely to see 10-20 companies with sales of $10m-$20m that end up eating that GW pie. That is usually how the big companies get taken apart in most markets.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
thetallestgiraffe wrote: It's demise will only come once people become disinterested in their products. There is only one variable that they have to look at; did the store make a profit? Yes? Then it will continue. It failed to? Then the store will close and business will be directed either online or to another store, once again making them profitable.
A better question would be "do you think that GW is loosing public interest?"
And this is their biggest problem! They have only two effective products now - WHFB and WH40k. If the public does indeed lose interest in one of those product families, most specifically 40k, GW will go down very fast. This is why most 30 year old companies DIVERSIFY product ranges. GW, on the other hand, has done the exact opposite - and it leaves them in a very precarious situation if the gaming public does lose interest, en mass, in one of their titles now.
And this is their biggest problem! They have only two effective products now - WHFB and WH40k. If the public does indeed lose interest in one of those product families, most specifically 40k, GW will go down very fast. This is why most 30 year old companies DIVERSIFY product ranges. GW, on the other hand, has done the exact opposite - and it leaves them in a very precarious situation if the gaming public does lose interest, en mass, in one of their titles now.
I don't know about some of you, but I would make it rain at GW if BFG and/or Epic were released with all new plastics.
And this is their biggest problem! They have only two effective products now - WHFB and WH40k. If the public does indeed lose interest in one of those product families, most specifically 40k, GW will go down very fast. This is why most 30 year old companies DIVERSIFY product ranges. GW, on the other hand, has done the exact opposite - and it leaves them in a very precarious situation if the gaming public does lose interest, en mass, in one of their titles now.
I don't know about some of you, but I would make it rain at GW if BFG and/or Epic were released with all new plastics.
I would seriously consider a heavy investment in both, I have to agree.
Sadly, however, we'll be looking at £1 or so per 5-model-stand in Epic, at a conservative estimate, and GW will probably play their current rule set shenanigans with that system too.
At the moment, even if GW did a U-turn on how they deal with their product ranges, I'd want to see some real change in how they treat their customers before I put my money where my dice live, in regards to GW.
As a retail store owner I can say for sure that GW is not dying any time soon. My inside numbers concerning everything they sell (expect for Dreadfleet and some of their books like Sigmar's Blood) are ridiculously high. However, I think GW is going to have to step up there game. With Infinity, warmachine/hordes/ malifaux and kick-starter successes like Relic Knights coming up to the plate, they are going to have some hard years ahead.
They continue to practice very dated business strategies (such as no store being allowed to GW products if they are within 10miles of each other) and continue to raise prices to ridiculous levels.
I think what we are seeing from GW right now are small attempts to change, but unless they do something significant they are easily going to drop from the top seller... to maybe 5th place.
Generalian wrote: As a retail store owner I can say for sure that GW is not dying any time soon. My inside numbers concerning everything they sell (expect for Dreadfleet and some of their books like Sigmar's Blood) are ridiculously high. However, I think GW is going to have to step up there game. With Infinity, warmachine/hordes/ malifaux and kick-starter successes like Relic Knights coming up to the plate, they are going to have some hard years ahead.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to raise a skeptical eyebrow at you.
As the former owner of a (non hobby) store, I seriously doubt that any internal sales info you're privy to is in any way the whole picture, and will most likely be a constructed image in order to reassure you/encourage you to buy more.
In addition, how can you know they're ridiculously high if you have nothing to compare it to? (If you do have sales figures for other companies product outside of just your store, that would be interesting reading) If I tell you I sold 1000 widgets last week, without context, how can you tel, if that's a record week or an unmitigated disaster?
Azreal13 wrote: If I tell you I sold 1000 widgets last week, without context, how can you tel, if that's a record week or an unmitigated disaster?
Given that the number is not in the tens, hundreds or thousands of thousands (10,000 - 1,000,000), it kinda hints at the latter, unless it's a particularly high value item.
Aside from that, I concur.
Azreal13 wrote: If I tell you I sold 1000 widgets last week, without context, how can you tel, if that's a record week or an unmitigated disaster?
Given that the number is not in the tens, hundreds or thousands of thousands (10,000 - 1,000,000), it kinda hints at the latter, unless it's a particularly high value item.
Aside from that, I concur.
His particular widget might be £80,000 jet bikes. Then weekly sales of 1,000 units might be decidedly impressive. His point being - context.
If GW won't allow FLGS within 10 miles of a GW store to carry the product, it certainly isn't being enforced in my area. I have a comic shop 1 mile from my house that stocks tons of 40k stuff. There is a GW 1/4 mile from me the other way on the same street. By my math, the stores are about 1.5 miles from each other. The GW store still manages to be highly successful (monthly average sales have gone up 110% in the past year).
And this is their biggest problem! They have only two effective products now - WHFB and WH40k. If the public does indeed lose interest in one of those product families, most specifically 40k, GW will go down very fast. This is why most 30 year old companies DIVERSIFY product ranges. GW, on the other hand, has done the exact opposite - and it leaves them in a very precarious situation if the gaming public does lose interest, en mass, in one of their titles now.
I don't know about some of you, but I would make it rain at GW if BFG and/or Epic were released with all new plastics.
I would seriously consider a heavy investment in both, I have to agree.
Sadly, however, we'll be looking at £1 or so per 5-model-stand in Epic, at a conservative estimate, and GW will probably play their current rule set shenanigans with that system too.
At the moment, even if GW did a U-turn on how they deal with their product ranges, I'd want to see some real change in how they treat their customers before I put my money where my dice live, in regards to GW.
From what I have heard from all (4) GW managers from different stores I've asked they all seem to think that all of the necromunda, epic, ect games are going to be re-released in the next year or two. I know that it's not like the necessarily have TOO much more inside knowledge than the rest of us but I would've thought that they'd have SOME insight into it.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: From what I have heard from all (4) GW managers from different stores I've asked they all seem to think that all of the necromunda, epic, ect games are going to be re-released in the next year or two. I know that it's not like the necessarily have TOO much more inside knowledge than the rest of us but I would've thought that they'd have SOME insight into it.
Just in time to save the next half-yearly report, no doubt.
It would make sense for them to do something like that. Lots of people still play 40k but have decided their existing armies are good enough and rarely add anything to them. Releasing a new game or re-releasing an old one would bring lots of new revenue. However, it's also going to cost more than just making a couple new models for an existing faction of an existing game. Hopefully if they do that, they won't price everything so astronomically high that it keeps people from picking up the new game. Without any advertising or social media presence, it will be difficult to get enough new players to be profitable. Most of their customers will be people who already play 40k. At that point they aren't getting new revenue, people are just spending their monthly 40k budget on a different GW product that costs the company more to produce and most likely has a lower margin.
Considering how well regarded some of those games are, and the popularity with veterans, it could be a very good move to bring them back in new, revised editions with new models.
It would also give GW some different lines to put in their shops which I think is an excellent idea.
The downsides are that it isn't very innovative, and presumably a lot of vets already have old editions and models they are happy with.
The re-issued games might do well with new recruits, though.
thetallestgiraffe wrote: From what I have heard from all (4) GW managers from different stores I've asked they all seem to think that all of the necromunda, epic, ect games are going to be re-released in the next year or two. I know that it's not like the necessarily have TOO much more inside knowledge than the rest of us but I would've thought that they'd have SOME insight into it.
Just in time to save the next half-yearly report, no doubt.
I wonder if it will this time. They have some serious competition in that space now. In addition, GW will probably do it like they did third edition Space Hulk. A quick, limited run to gain some quick cash. For GW veterans, considering the support GW has given SGs over the last decade, will they really want to jump on the bandwagon of something they know GW is not going to support?
Space Hulk succeeded because the original version went OOP a long time ago, the game had massive heritage, and the production values of the new edition were extremely good.
I wouldn't buy a limited run, box set for BFG/Epic. If they want my money, it'd be a full blown game again with rules support, plastic spaceships, and other goodies.
Then again, I currently don't have a lot of faith they'd make the rules any better than the player done 2010 FAQ for BFG, not to mention other clean rulesets for spaceships like FSA.
I do love the BFG models though. Easily my favourite all around line up of models. FSA is pretty close now though with their redone lines.
Toofast wrote:Releasing a new game or re-releasing an old one would bring lots of new revenue.
Kilkrazy wrote:Considering how well regarded some of those games are, and the popularity with veterans, it could be a very good move to bring them back in new, revised editions with new models.
The re-issued games might do well with new recruits, though.
Considering the SGs were canned last time because they either didn't sell (I'm guessing because they weren't 40K, i.e, winning didn't depend on the biggest gun you could buy), or sell well enough, or apparently cannibalised sales from 40K; colour me sceptical.
If GW do re-release them within a year, I'll take that as a supremely desperate move and evidence that they are going under.
Answer to original question: Not sure if they're going under, but I don't get emotionally invested like some people do. If they did, or they priced me out of the hobby, I'd move along but still enjoy painting my old models and grabbing games.
Blacksails wrote: I wouldn't buy a limited run, box set for BFG/Epic. If they want my money, it'd be a full blown game again with rules support, plastic spaceships, and other goodies.
Then again, I currently don't have a lot of faith they'd make the rules any better than the player done 2010 FAQ for BFG, not to mention other clean rulesets for spaceships like FSA.
I do love the BFG models though. Easily my favourite all around line up of models. FSA is pretty close now though with their redone lines.
Have you tried Firestorm Armada? I want to, but just curious if this scratches the BFG itch.
Epic 40k seems like that's the game I want to play, large battles but without a massive price tag on 28mm scale Epic.
I for one don't see this happening some time soon.
they are big, they got loads of money saved and owe pretty much zero - unless they deliberately on purpose employ morons to just drive GW down to the soil I think they are safe and the loss of profits are just the signs of a rocky recession/economy it will soon fade out.
Point is too many lovers of their gak will keep it a float even though we all b*tch about their costs etc
kerikhaos wrote: I for one don't see this happening some time soon.
they are big, they got loads of money saved and owe pretty much zero - unless they deliberately on purpose employ morons to just drive GW down to the soil I think they are safe and the loss of profits are just the signs of a rocky recession/economy it will soon fade out.
Point is too many lovers of their gak will keep it a float even though we all b*tch about their costs etc
Except that despite the wider economy the tabletop games market has been growing by 10 or 15% every year for several years now. That's the truly worrying part as it means GWs problems can't be handwaved away by the economy, they are remaining stagnate (untill the last report which showed them shrinking drastically) in a market that's experiencing a golden age of growth.
Another factor to bare in mind come the report - at time of writing the UK has record, or near record, levels of employment (while paying due deference to that number featuring record numbers of part time and 0 hour contracts) and it was announced this week that the UK economy has recovered to pre crisis levels.
Hollismason wrote: I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, probably a good thing ?
Good for GW right now, since it suggests confidence in a share price increase in the immediate future (since if you expect share price to drop after a bad report you'd wait until after the report to buy). Whether it's good for GW in the long run depends on why the financial report is expected to be good. If they showed an increase in profits only because of cost cutting and the 7th edition sales spike then it's probably just a sign of an investor looking to make a short-term profit and doesn't promise any long-term success.
Also note that this is a very minor shareholder making a small purchase compared to the number of shares they already hold, so it's quite likely that it's just a case of making a regularly-scheduled purchase based on their current investment plan and/or employee benefits. GW is just legally required to report these events, regardless of how significant they are.
Have you tried Firestorm Armada? I want to, but just curious if this scratches the BFG itch.
Epic 40k seems like that's the game I want to play, large battles but without a massive price tag on 28mm scale Epic.
I haven't personally but I didn't particularly like Uncharted Seas which apparently has very similar rules. Epic does have excellent rules but its virtually impossible to actually find a game, Dropzone Commander looks like it will be an excellent alternative in terms of scale, popularity and quality. Hawk Games (who make DZC) are in the process of writing a space combat game in conjunction with Andy Chambers, its just possible that it will be an excellent substitute for BFG.
My problem with GW re-releasing 'specialist games' is that they will undoubtedly be limited editions (and therefore all but useless) and that GW will probably ruin the rules. GW was foolish to let SGs wither but I no longer trust GW to do them justice.
That really doesn't mean anything. I once worked for a company that knew the reporting was going to be bad so the senior officers of the company decided to purchase stock to show their "confidence" in the company just prior to the reporting.
they are big, they got loads of money saved and owe pretty much zero -
I don't understand where people keep thinking this. As of last reporting session they had £9.2m cash. That is not a lot considering they have £36.7m in fixed expenses per period (in addition to 28% in variable sale expense). So basically, they have 1.5 months of cash on hand should things downturn quickly.
Yes and sort of. I have tried to get games of Epic set up for years but so I haven't been successful. I will probably start going to the GTs when I move northward later in the year.
Have you tried Firestorm Armada? I want to, but just curious if this scratches the BFG itch.
Epic 40k seems like that's the game I want to play, large battles but without a massive price tag on 28mm scale Epic.
I picked up FSA in the V1 days (2010), where it was a simple game lacking any real depth or any distinction between factions, not to mention the quality of the models.
I recently got back into now that V2 is out, and its a far better game. Its still pretty simple and straightforward compared to BFG, but has a lot more depth and unique play style between faction now than before. What I like about the game compared to BFG and 40k is the alternating activation system, which keeps you and your opponent more engaged, as well as using certain tactics/list building strategies to play to that advantage.
I may be a little biased, as I'm working to get on the beta team for FSA, and I post regularly on the Spartan boards. But yes, spaceships blowing up other spaceships helps fill the void of BFG. Admittedly, BFG models will probably always be my favourite.
That's just an example of doing things the right way though.
Requiring a player to purchase a lot of models at a high price in order for them to be able to actively participate in the game at the accepted game size is likely to make the player feel manipulated, railroaded, violated, insert your own term here.
Charging a high price for models, but not requiring the purchase of a lot of models to participate, and stimulating the desire in players once they've started, either by your conduct as a company or by the quality of your product (in many cases both) so that the player feels content that while they're paying a lot for them, they're happy to do so because (here comes that V word again) they feel they're getting value from the purchase, is, to my mind, the only way to run a business. GW management clearly aren't of the same philosophy.
Davor wrote: I was going to start up Dropzone Commander. They are expensive just like GW. Not GW expensive, but expensive non the less.
Not really, my 1500 point UCM list cost me £150, that would be expensive for a skirmish game or a historical game but its not that bad in the scheme of things.
Totally anecdotal but I stuck my nose in the battle bunker in the city the other day and... Wow.
Four years ago I was a regular there and there where days when there where 30 tables being used at any one time and the 8 seats at the painting table where something people had to show up early to get. They used to have 3 staff selling stuff, painting things in store and running demos.
The other day I saw 1 game being played and 3 people at the painting table. There would have been 10 people in the store including me and my friend. We spent maybe 20 minutes there and in that time we picked up and looked at more than a few things but where never approached by the one employee there so we simply left without buying anything.
All that, in addition to the lovely custom tables being swapped out for realm of battle with only scenery made from GW kits, was genuinely depressing to see.
jonolikespie wrote: Totally anecdotal but I stuck my nose in the battle bunker in the city the other day and... Wow.
Four years ago I was a regular there and there where days when there where 30 tables being used at any one time and the 8 seats at the painting table where something people had to show up early to get. They used to have 3 staff selling stuff, painting things in store and running demos.
The other day I saw 1 game being played and 3 people at the painting table. There would have been 10 people in the store including me and my friend. We spent maybe 20 minutes there and in that time we picked up and looked at more than a few things but where never approached by the one employee there so we simply left without buying anything.
All that, in addition to the lovely custom tables being swapped out for realm of battle with only scenery made from GW kits, was genuinely depressing to see.
I dont know what a battle bunker is, but at the GW in the city its a similar situation.
Its still very well presented and so forth, but its pretty empty and the boards are now very lackluster. Back in 07 when I was finally able to buy my first army the place was packed. There where 3 staff members who talked and played games, heaps of games happening and painting tutorials. The manager (nathan or baldy as many refer to him as in NZ) was still a dick back then, still is now, but with the other staff at least you could avoid him.
Mid 2013 I went to GW as I was passing buy. One guy (nathan) about 7 kids who just got dropped off by a mother at the painting table and about 4 guys playing some tiny game on some tiny board with unpainted models etc. Just looked sad and somewhat dead.
Like yours anecdotal, but there is a lot missing there that used to make people excited to go. Meh, the GW only policy would never make me go back regardless, but I can only imagine the few stores in the wellington region (2?) being open for a little while longer at most.
Seems high. I'm going with 20% loss in net profit.
Do you really think GW is "going under"? I don't think they are going away soon. However, I think they need to pull their head out of the proverbial... I wonder how much FW sales are carrying them right now. That's all I and several players from my old group are buying, other than codecies.
5-15% seems the likely range*. We've got a base of down 10% for H1, it's just a question of what effect you think the Knight + 7th Ed are going to have on H2 on a YoY basis to arrive at a full year prediction.
*This fence is comfy......
EDIT: for example, to reach the 20% down full year in the above post, H2 would have to be down either ~27% or ~33% (I can't remember which half is slightly bigger, and it's not important enough to look up for this example!)
I think this report won't be as bad as some people think. Knights and 7th ed were probably a big enough boost for this year. That said, SM dex, Knights and a new edition are all their big guns which leaves nothing much left for next year when they'll also have nothing left to cut. It's the long run that they're going to suffer from the amount of players they lost from "cash grab edition."
MWHistorian wrote: I think this report won't be as bad as some people think. Knights and 7th ed were probably a big enough boost for this year. That said, SM dex, Knights and a new edition are all their big guns which leaves nothing much left for next year when they'll also have nothing left to cut. It's the long run that they're going to suffer from the amount of players they lost from "cash grab edition."
Cue Fntasy 9th edition at Christmas 2014 to see if that helps the half year report.
If it doesn't then 40K 8th will be coming next June.
MWHistorian wrote: I think this report won't be as bad as some people think. Knights and 7th ed were probably a big enough boost for this year. That said, SM dex, Knights and a new edition are all their big guns which leaves nothing much left for next year when they'll also have nothing left to cut. It's the long run that they're going to suffer from the amount of players they lost from "cash grab edition."
I agree. I assume that new editions of rules and codexes sell fastest at the beginning. If they sell evenly throughout their life it would be a different thing.
Conversely it will hardly be good news if the report is merely average given the number of major products launched during the financial year.
MWHistorian wrote: I think this report won't be as bad as some people think. Knights and 7th ed were probably a big enough boost for this year. That said, SM dex, Knights and a new edition are all their big guns which leaves nothing much left for next year when they'll also have nothing left to cut. It's the long run that they're going to suffer from the amount of players they lost from "cash grab edition."
Cue Fntasy 9th edition at Christmas 2014 to see if that helps the half year report.
If it doesn't then 40K 8th will be coming next June.
Wouldn't doubt it, but that's a good point. I think that sales might be down overall, but still a profit due to IK + 7th. Like MWHistorian said though, that's all they've got. So it'll be 9th edition Fantasy later this year, and then what? They can only pad the numbers for so long. Think of it like a chess game: They are running out of moves to make, and when they run out it's checkmate.
If 40k 8th edition comes out within two years again, and isn't a total revamp a la 2nd -> 3rd, it's going to be the final nail in their coffin I think. Even GW wouldn't be that stupid. Maybe if they gave it away for free they could pull a stunt like that.
1st half had a 10% decline in sales and 30% less profits with the release of SM.
2nd half had the release of 7th ed, so I'm putting my money in a continuation of the 10% decline in sales.
WHFB is dead and buried, unless 9th edition is a return to the 6th edition type of rules, any new edition of the game won't sell anything like the amount that GW needs to prop up their numbers, and frankly at this point I don't think that anyone that is left in GWs rules design team has any of the competence needed to write a good rules set for any game.
1st half had a 10% decline in sales and 30% less profits with the release of SM.
2nd half had the release of 7th ed, so I'm putting my money in a continuation of the 10% decline in sales.
WHFB is dead and buried, unless 9th edition is a return to the 6th edition type of rules, any new edition of the game won't sell anything like the amount that GW needs to prop up their numbers, and frankly at this point I don't think that anyone that is left in GWs rules design team has any of the competence needed to write a good rules set for any game.
They could always try to have a new version of WHFB that uses the LOTR/Hobbit rules (which I hear are actually pretty good), just knowing GW they would use it to invalidate every existing army and end up killing it anyways, because you know they would use that as an excuse to redo everything.
They could always try to have a new version of WHFB that uses the LOTR/Hobbit rules (which I hear are actually pretty good), just knowing GW they would use it to invalidate every existing army and end up killing it anyways, because you know they would use that as an excuse to redo everything.
I keep hearing this as well, but if the rules are that good, then why doesn't anyone actually played those games after the original trilogy movies ended?
MWHistorian wrote: I think this report won't be as bad as some people think. Knights and 7th ed were probably a big enough boost for this year. That said, SM dex, Knights and a new edition are all their big guns which leaves nothing much left for next year when they'll also have nothing left to cut. It's the long run that they're going to suffer from the amount of players they lost from "cash grab edition."
I thought it was said for the 1st half of sales were down which was Including the new Space Marine sales. So SM didn't help at all in the 1st half.
Now that being said who is GW catering too? Is it the kids with rich parents or the veterans? I mean an edition change will not make much money for GW from kids with rich parents because they are just getting into 40K, but it would seem the edition change was aimed at 40K veterans since they are the ones who want to be kept updated and therefore buy the new stuff.
So this puzzles me, who is 40K actually catering too. If the kids, why an edition change? They are usually just getting into the hobby so will be buying no matter what. Veterans have already bought everything or most things, so an edition change would be aimed at them to buy more. Could that be another downfall for GW? They don't know who they are catering to anymore?
MWHistorian wrote: I think this report won't be as bad as some people think. Knights and 7th ed were probably a big enough boost for this year. That said, SM dex, Knights and a new edition are all their big guns which leaves nothing much left for next year when they'll also have nothing left to cut. It's the long run that they're going to suffer from the amount of players they lost from "cash grab edition."
I thought it was said for the 1st half of sales were down which was Including the new Space Marine sales. So SM didn't help at all in the 1st half.
Now that being said who is GW catering too? Is it the kids with rich parents or the veterans? I mean an edition change will not make much money for GW from kids with rich parents because they are just getting into 40K, but it would seem the edition change was aimed at 40K veterans since they are the ones who want to be kept updated and therefore buy the new stuff.
So this puzzles me, who is 40K actually catering too. If the kids, why an edition change? They are usually just getting into the hobby so will be buying no matter what. Veterans have already bought everything or most things, so an edition change would be aimed at them to buy more. Could that be another downfall for GW? They don't know who they are catering to anymore?
I think that they are catering to "anyone who will buy our stuff", honestly. Kids with rich parents aren't going to shell out an insane amount of money for a game, no matter what; maybe a box here and there, but not anything crazy. The veterans won't buy as much usually because they already have large armies, and might get ticked off if entire swathes of their force is invalidated or removed with a new edition.
They could always try to have a new version of WHFB that uses the LOTR/Hobbit rules (which I hear are actually pretty good), just knowing GW they would use it to invalidate every existing army and end up killing it anyways, because you know they would use that as an excuse to redo everything.
I keep hearing this as well, but if the rules are that good, then why doesn't anyone actually played those games after the original trilogy movies ended?
Because GW basically stopped supporting it and cut off the deal with the advertising company which had brought in so many players.
They also did away with the things I liked about it (all rules for all models in one book, simple army building rules etc.) and which, I think, made it such a simple and effective ruleset. Being able to buy the Return of the King set and getting a load of Orcs and Men, the full colour rulebook containing the rules for the whole model line and having the freedom to build your army your way (with the only real limit being you couldn't have over a third of your models armed with bows) was great. Turning it into Fantasy-Lite with the the rules for different races spread over several books with no actual change in any of their rules and the introduction of the warband system which makes building an army much more confusing was not.
They also massively raised the prices of troop boxes whilst cutting the number of models you got in half.
When the price of your models, makes a 10% drop in sales equal a 30% drop in profits. Any drop in sales is catastrophic. Gw needs to equal or better the last quarter sales, just to tread water.
I don't buy any GW rules and avoid buying their minis but seeing as I really enjoy the 40k and Fantasy universe I find it hard to move even though I'm not a fan of Games Workshop
Wow... That letter. It's like hearing the plane captain over the intercom saying "Those idiots back there said we'd need X gallons of fuel, but I was willing to call their bluff."
I just want to see the positive spin someone will be putting on that if it's true. I really have trouble seeing it as true because it looks like a parody. Poe's law though I guess.
Stock ended 15 points up today. Things may not be as bad as the doomsayers would like.
The letter read like standard corporate speak. I had a chance to fix it. I didn't but lets look at the good things I did. Basically don't burn your stock notes just yet...
lobbywatson wrote: Stock ended 15 points up today. Things may not be as bad as the doomsayers would like.
The letter read like standard corporate speak. I had a chance to fix it. I didn't but lets look at the good things I did. Basically don't burn your stock notes just yet...
The 15 point jump was probably due to Kirby leaving his position as CEO.
The letter read like standard corporate speak. I had a chance to fix it. I didn't but lets look at the good things I did. Basically don't burn your stock notes just yet...
It read like the diary of a mad man. He even said that he hired people for attitude over ability and that he's proud of it. How would you feel knowing that your electrician or plumber was hired for their attitude and not ability?
That's not something to be proud of. That's saying you kept inept people employed simply because you liked having conversation with them. This all comes out after you've been juggling the company's money on frivolous lawsuits, poor spending on the website redesign, and cost cutting measures.
The rant at the end about how "3-D printers will never be a thing. Look it up. If it was a thing, we would be selling Citadel printers. If it ever becomes a thing, and it won't, then we will jump on last minute to make money off it."
I'm expecting a limited edition special tutorial series on painting to be released on the website, available only on the highest quality of VHS.
Kilkrazy wrote: The share price of a company shows nothing except what price people want to buy and sell the shares at.
That's what I was getting at.
I remember a BOLS article a little while back that theorized on how WD sales must be really good since the share prices had been slowly recovering after the HY report.
Kilkrazy wrote: The share price of a company shows nothing except what price people want to buy and sell the shares at.
Not really that true. Shares represent actual money input into the company from external sources. It's a pretty good indicator of a company's percieved health by the market, as it literally represents investors (usually companies) saying "we've seen you doing well, we think we can make money off your dividends". Selling is a big part of the stock market, but as far as I'm aware, GW isn't really a company you'd attempt to day trade, so their shares tend to mean how much people are willing to put in rather than a gamble on return from raising prices.
Kilkrazy wrote: The share price of a company shows nothing except what price people want to buy and sell the shares at.
Not really that true. Shares represent actual money input into the company from external sources.
Only the IPO represents actual money put into the company (or the sale of any centrally held shares, though this is uncommon). After the IPO, money paid for shares doesn't go to the company.
Kilkrazy wrote: The share price of a company shows nothing except what price people want to buy and sell the shares at.
Not really that true. Shares represent actual money input into the company from external sources. It's a pretty good indicator of a company's percieved health by the market, as it literally represents investors (usually companies) saying "we've seen you doing well, we think we can make money off your dividends". Selling is a big part of the stock market, but as far as I'm aware, GW isn't really a company you'd attempt to day trade, so their shares tend to mean how much people are willing to put in rather than a gamble on return from raising prices.
Other inaccuracies in what you're saying have already been addressed, but to take some thing else you've said, GW might not be a "day trade" type company, but one can clearly see that their price has spiked at some very predictable times, namely just prior to the qualification date for a dividend, with a steady decline after the dividend payment date, and then another small blip today, presumably from people grabbing some stock prior to tomorrow's report in the hope that it is positive and the price spikes again.
So I'd suggest that GW stock is being bought speculatively to a degree, if not exactly day traded.
Back on to the topic, the evidence is that the 11% fall in revenue between June 2013 and Dec 2013 caused a 26% drop in profits. That is because a large amount of GW's costs are fixed and cannot be reduced quickly. Even if GW sack staff and close shops, it damages their ability to market the game, so it is a desperation measure.
This "preamble" opens with a statement that can only be understood as meaning that the end of year figures are bad, so the trend of the first half has continued.
If this trend continued in 2014-2015 we might see the profit entirely eliminated. If continued the next year -- 2015-2016 -- GW would be in real trouble, making losses that they would have to spend their cash or take loans to defray. Once loss-making it becomes a lot harder to change things because you need to spend money to do so.
Kirby isn't going until half-way through 2014-2015. He will have a big influence on his successor because the current board will choose the new CEO. Kirby's "kronies" konstitute the board. Kirby will remain as chairman with considerable influence though no direct executive power.
Even if a revolutionary manages to sneak into GW he/she is unlikely to be able to make a big difference until the Kirby plan will have been shown to the GW board to be completely useless. That is unlikely to happen for a couple more years. It might by then be too late to turn things around.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To clarify my position, I had thought that the release of 7th edition would pull GW's nuts out of the fire. This dismal preamble makes me think that it didn't.
If that is the case, GW will be seen to have had a bad year even when releasing Space Marines and new 40K rules, that huge numbers of people could have been expected to buy but did not.
It seems as though GW is determined to press on and find new customers, while doing no research on how to do that. They seem to think that if they can open enough stores in enough new places, they will sell more models because people really enjoy buying their models.
Thairne wrote: Thats some brutal numbers.
I'd better stop buying 40k models, soon there won't be any game left to play...
Brother, I wouldn't be worried too much. Business will go on for a while.
We here stepped into WM/H being a decent alternative.
True, but I love my 40k dearly... I seriously dig the fluff and the models and it is a sad day to see such a strong IP get run to the ground SO badly.
I don't WANT to switch to another system, but I feel it's better to cope with my "losses" and move on sooner than later.
Now if only I can bring myself to do this... *hrrngh*
The ignorance in the report is astounding. Sales drop by huge margins from year to year with new products coming out, and their only answer is "OPEN MOAR STORES!"
How ignorant does one have to be?
I duno man, I'm already considering just saying screw it and playing 5th edition with my models. My gaming community around town is smaller than ever and the only people that want to keep up with all the rules don't even bother painting the armies. They just have 3 squads of every new release undercoated within seconds of release.
This would be great for GW if there were many people doing that, but in my area its more like 3 or 4 people. I showed up at one store for open game night, only to find everyone playing warmachine.
At this point, I'd rather finish up 3 or 4 1-2k armies, and play casually with some friends. 3rd, 4th, or 5th edition seem so much easier to play with newbies anyway.
Point being, I can still enjoy the hobby without GW's survival.
Well, another way to look at it is that the death of Games Workshop isn't the death of 40K.
That's partially why I kind of wantGW to tank, honestly. Even if they go, the chances are good that another company is going to either absorb GW or at least scoop up 40K, because any smart business can see the value in the IP. 40K was the premiere, leading brand of Wargaming for a long time, and has a built-in, loyal fanbase despite GW's treatment of them. There is a lot of potential to turn that IP into something much bigger, with the right business practices, and a smart company will know that.
So the death of Games Workshop could be the birth of 40K getting the care it deserves.
Not to get all doom and gloomy in here. I think GW has at least another half-decade or so of life left in it- but if it doesn't make radical changes to its business model, to emphasize customer growth rather than merely expense reductions, it won't have a chance.
Yeah, problem is I have a total of 3 people to play with.
One is getting more into FoW, the next is TFG that starts singing dirges for your troops when you loose and fields Wraith Knights against guys which just have no clue and basic troops (I kid you not, never saw such a bad looser/winner) which leaves one dude.
Maybe I can get some 1 or 2 people more I see play every week or other, but 40k is pretty deadish here already. If GW dies I have litteraly no hope of finding a game ever.
I'm close to finishing (paint-wise) my first DW army, had plans for a RW/Gerantius and was thinking of branching out into another codex afterswards (Crons or Nids).
But with this numbers and attitude shown in the report... Mind you, I only have some basic knowledge of business, but dropping from 25kk profit to 12kk with another 8% loss in sales yet again and a stubborn management that doesn't get whats wrong with their company puts this in great peril.
I thought about this as well. 40k is just a really strong IP as you said. It's a straw to grasp, but one I am willing to hold on to for a while longer. Let's hope all turns out good in the end.. for in the grim darkness of the near future, there must be 40k.
Can someone summarize the important parts of the report, in laymen's terms?
It will take some time to read through everything and make a good evaluation.
The headline item, though, is that sales are down 7% compared to last year, which is the worst performance since 2005-6.
The worry about this is that they relaunched Space Marines, Imperial Guard, Tyranids and 40K core rules, plus Imperial Knight Titans, Stormtroopers and various other stuff (Dark Angles), and still posted these bad numbers. So there is a feeling they have shot off a lot of their ammunition and missed the market, and what can they do next year?
There are some positive things:
They are still in profit.
They have a lot of money in the bank.
There is no immediate danger of them going out of business, and realistically it would take two or three years of continuing decline.
IMO the most important thing is that sales did decline again, which should silence the "but it was only a temporary drop" crowd. This pretty clearly confirms that GW's problems are real and not just a bunch of "haters" posting the same rants for the past 20 years. And what's worrying about this is that GW doesn't seem to have any plan for reversing the trend, which makes "2-3 years of decline" look more like an inevitable outcome than a worst-case scenario.
Peregrine wrote: IMO the most important thing is that sales did decline again, which should silence the "but it was only a temporary drop" crowd. This pretty clearly confirms that GW's problems are real and not just a bunch of "haters" posting the same rants for the past 20 years. And what's worrying about this is that GW doesn't seem to have any plan for reversing the trend, which makes "2-3 years of decline" look more like an inevitable outcome than a worst-case scenario.
The did have a plan. They enacted it and it clearly failed.
Honestly, I wonder how bad the numbers would have been without 7th Ed, Codex: Space Marine, Imperial Knights and IG the staff cutting.
Hopefully this will show them that they can't just keep cutting costs without doing something to increase revenue. Their magic plan to increase revenue is just to raise prices, making some people spend the same amount and just get less models, and making other people quit. It's not as bad as a lot of people thought it would be, but they need to do something about it soon.
Peregrine wrote: IMO the most important thing is that sales did decline again, which should silence the "but it was only a temporary drop" crowd. This pretty clearly confirms that GW's problems are real and not just a bunch of "haters" posting the same rants for the past 20 years. And what's worrying about this is that GW doesn't seem to have any plan for reversing the trend, which makes "2-3 years of decline" look more like an inevitable outcome than a worst-case scenario.
I'm glad sales declined primarily so we have something to throw in the face of "they keep doing it because people keep buying it" crowd
Toofast wrote: Hopefully this will show them that they can't just keep cutting costs without doing something to increase revenue. Their magic plan to increase revenue is just to raise prices, making some people spend the same amount and just get less models, and making other people quit. It's not as bad as a lot of people thought it would be, but they need to do something about it soon.
What I find worrying is the possibility that they (i.e Kirby) are either too stubborn to change their strategy, or (even worse) simply don't even know how to adequately turn things around in time.
BlaxicanX wrote: Well, another way to look at it is that the death of Games Workshop isn't the death of 40K.
That's partially why I kind of wantGW to tank, honestly. Even if they go, the chances are good that another company is going to either absorb GW or at least scoop up 40K, because any smart business can see the value in the IP. 40K was the premiere, leading brand of Wargaming for a long time, and has a built-in, loyal fanbase despite GW's treatment of them. There is a lot of potential to turn that IP into something much bigger, with the right business practices, and a smart company will know that.
So the death of Games Workshop could be the birth of 40K getting the care it deserves.
Not to get all doom and gloomy in here. I think GW has at least another half-decade or so of life left in it- but if it doesn't make radical changes to its business model, to emphasize customer growth rather than merely expense reductions, it won't have a chance.
I agree entirely. I think one of the best things that could happen to the 40K IP is if Games Workshop no longer was at the helm. I have literally seen 40K go from a hobby that was in every FLGS in my area, to a handful that barely support it anymore. The entry cost of the hobby is no longer realistic. I've tried to get people interested in it, but how can I justify them spending several hundred dollars to play a tabletop game when there are so many other alternatives? I'm not even talking about things like Warmachine etc. I have just as much fun playing board games like Zombicide or Arkham Horror etc that cost a fraction of what 40K does.
Honestly I dunno what's more distressing, the data, or GW's response to the data.
Because honestly... I'm not exactly dancing at this news- I doubt many people are. It would be preferable for GW to not go under, and for tons of people to not lose their jobs...
It would be preferable if they could just pull their heads out of their asses. lol
jonolikespie wrote: All that, in addition to the lovely custom tables being swapped out for realm of battle with only scenery made from GW kits, was genuinely depressing to see.
That's the tragic part. A world of interesting and varied terrain all replaced by homogenised, sanctioned and sterile Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
The shares chat is interesting, as to what shareholders are thinking.
http://www.lse.co.uk/ShareChat.asp?page=1&ShareTicker=GAW Fagen39
Hi OGB,
It was all good with these shares (I have been holding since Jan 12) they held up well during the recession (due to consumer loyalty) and paid a cracking dividend (which is the main driver of the good share price). The recent knock was becuase share holders through that due to poor operating performance the divi would be at risk which was then swiftly dealt with by the 20p divi announcement.
If operating issues can be stabalised then the share price will continue to grow back to +20% from the current position. The main worry for me is the strategic direction of the business. They do not appear to be moving quickly enough with modern times and modern consumers:
- Their books are not on kindle (or any other e-reader)
- They are not proactively managing the worries around 3d printing replacing their products
- They are not interacting with their consumers in the right way e.g. focusing on video clips to build characters, , films, facebook, twitter, etc.....
Their products are only going to seem more expensive without the advertising support.
Imagine 3D printing a Space Marine commander with your head and printing him up ready for battle.
So not a conclusing 'buy' recommendation but I am still going to hold for a while longer.
OldGasBag
Hi everyone!! I popped into my local games workshop store today for the first time in 20 years and I was shocked that the prices they charge these days and also the very limited lines/products which they produce these days. Granted it is 20 years since I last bought any GW products but I can't be the only one that remembers all those great board games blood bowl, Talisman etc...Why don't they increase there product lines bring back the old favorites surely that would help. Anyway walking through those doors has made me all nostalgic so its E Bay for me. Might even buy a few shares if I can get up to pace with whats going on here. Anyone care to summarise what life is like as a GAW share holder. Thx in advance...
Killkrazy just calculated the 0.9175 but must have made an error in rounding and called it 0.91 and then 0.91 - 1 = -9% when it should have been -8.25%. Either that or mistakenly though the 0.9175 was the 9%, when it actually means that 123.5 is 91.75% of 134.6
reading this i feel they have their head in the sand, further more they dont appear to acknowledge the competition, yes they are the only people who make their branded items, however a portion of their community is made up of people who like strategy tabletop games and will jump ship if another producer has a better game. with that in mind both Privateer Press and Fantasy Flight have been gaining market share. then we have people who will play the game but by models either from the 2nd hand market or go to companies who make similar looking models and in some cases better quality or more unique looking figures.
Kickstarter has funded a large amount of miniatures games over the last year and while they may not last, they buzz created by these launches could be drawing attention away from Games Workshop. One company Mantic have been quiet successfully using kickstarter for their miniature games, acting almost as a pre-order system which could minimise losses by gauging the appeal of the product before they go into full production.
Hi Fagen39, while i agree with everything else youve posted, in defence of GamesWorkshop they do produce e-books both for their novels and rules of the game for a variety of operating systems, however they seem quiet expensive.
Oldgasbag yes in the store they have cut back on their IP to only 3 ranges of which Lord of the Rings seems to be slowly falling away in popularity. however they licences out to fantasyflight the rights to produce roleplay books and boardgames.
Kilkrazy wrote: We probably calculated from different figures, however the crucial point is that sales overall are significantly down.
Despite some easy frags on our wallets : Imperial Knights, 7th edition...
The next financial report will be dreadful.
I think 7th hasn't been the trump card GW thought it would be. Sales were most likely low due to the halved lifespan of 6th souring a LOT of customers (I don't really know many who own it even now) coupled with yet an even higher price for the book.
However, the full effects of this release will be born out over the next year, as many customers refusing to buy a new rulebook means there be a chain reaction of decreasing sales in 40k products.
I don't see GW digging themselves out of this without turning into an entirely different company.
With all the big releases we've seen this year, its not a good sign their revenue still managed to shrink.
They're still making money, and they still have money in the bank, but it looks like their customer base has and is continuing to shrink faster than they can plug the holes with marines and knights.
I'm not hopeful for GW's future if they keep on their current path.
Kilkrazy wrote: We probably calculated from different figures, however the crucial point is that sales overall are significantly down.
Despite some easy frags on our wallets : Imperial Knights, 7th edition...
The next financial report will be dreadful.
I think 7th hasn't been the trump card GW thought it would be. Sales were most likely low due to the halved lifespan of 6th souring a LOT of customers (I don't really know many who own it even now) coupled with yet an even higher price for the book.
However, the full effects of this release will be born out over the next year, as many customers refusing to buy a new rulebook means there be a chain reaction of decreasing sales in 40k products.
I don't see GW digging themselves out of this without turning into an entirely different company.
I think many customers also weren't willing to pay for the big set of rulebooks like GW planned. I think, at this stage, far more customers were willing to wait for the boxed set to come out and just get a mini-rulebook from that (quite possibly from ebay).
The more I read the only thing I can hear is
"This is your pilot, Captain Kirby, speaking. Just wanted to let everyone know that I had the landing gear removed and jettisoned all the fuel to reduce the weight. Smooth sailing ahead."
Automatically Appended Next Post: I just can't wrap my head around this. How can someone think like this.
"They'll buy what we make"
Except sales are down! You're making and they aren't buying. Why don't you see why they aren't buying in an industry that's growing?
"We are trying to open more stores in the USA"
Why? How does that fix anything? 58% of sales were from independent stores in the US and you're trying to put more stores in there to build up more cost and attempt to take sales away from independent stores. How is viewing stores that purchase bulk product as a competitor you want to steal sales from a good thing?!
I remember Dakkanauts like HBMC speaking of GW, saying things like "we don't make what they want, they buy what me make." I didn't believe I would see Tom Kirby saying the exact same thing.
Yes, there certainly are various elements of GW's behaviour that seem logically contradictory.
I certainly agree that a lot more people would have bought the 7th edition rules if GW had released the rulebook only, prices say £20 or more likely £25, as an option to the whole set at £50.
I bought the limited 6th ed. Collector's rulebook. Finding it invalidate in only two years, I was really quite angry about this change in cycle- it felt super disingenuous and all collector's items since this time have felt to me as having no real value.
Seeing 7th come out at a price even higher than 6th made me decide to halt any future rule book purchases. I have since been exploring the option of playing a previous edition because I still very much enjoy my models, but my purchasing has dropped to near-zero. Which is surprising to me still; I've been buying models since 3rd and the stop has nothing to do with a diminishing interest...it's all about the feeling of exploitation on GW's part.
Accolade wrote: I remember Dakkanauts like HBMC speaking of GW, saying things like "we don't make what they want, they buy what me make." I didn't believe I would see Tom Kirby saying the exact same thing.
The letter from Kirby would have me extremely worried if I were an investor. It was poorly and unprofessionally written and did nothing but try and deflect criticism instead of talking about any strength.
You can colour me annoyed by the whole new rulebook thing too. I bought into 6th but 7th, not so much. Why buy a new rulebook that might be invalidated again so soon?
Accolade wrote: I remember Dakkanauts like HBMC speaking of GW, saying things like "we don't make what they want, they buy what me make." I didn't believe I would see Tom Kirby saying the exact same thing.
The letter from Kirby would have me extremely worried if I were an investor. It was poorly and unprofessionally written and did nothing but try and deflect criticism instead of talking about any strength.
The whole comment about hiring based on attitude and not ability really scared me. It sounds like he enjoys being surrounded by Yes Men. If only the investors and customers could see things the way that people he pays to agree with him see things.
Accolade wrote: I remember Dakkanauts like HBMC speaking of GW, saying things like "we don't make what they want, they buy what me make." I didn't believe I would see Tom Kirby saying the exact same thing.
The letter from Kirby would have me extremely worried if I were an investor. It was poorly and unprofessionally written and did nothing but try and deflect criticism instead of talking about any strength.
The whole comment about hiring based on attitude and not ability really scared me. It sounds like he enjoys being surrounded by Yes Men. If only the investors and customers could see things the way that people he pays to agree with him see things.
He didn't get where he is today by ability. so it's not surprising really.
Accolade wrote: I remember Dakkanauts like HBMC speaking of GW, saying things like "we don't make what they want, they buy what me make." I didn't believe I would see Tom Kirby saying the exact same thing.
The letter from Kirby would have me extremely worried if I were an investor. It was poorly and unprofessionally written and did nothing but try and deflect criticism instead of talking about any strength.
The whole comment about hiring based on attitude and not ability really scared me. It sounds like he enjoys being surrounded by Yes Men. If only the investors and customers could see things the way that people he pays to agree with him see things.
Hell, even the person he hired as the NXD sounded concerned that her resume was never even looked at (though Kirby uses the term "exasperated")
I honestly think that in order for GW to save themselves, they need to do the following:
1) Lower prices. You cannot tell me that molds are expensive, because they made that back 100 times within a few months of the product being on the shelves. $82 for a Stormraven, $74 for a Land Raider, $78 (might be a bit off on this one) for three frakkin Centurians is criminal, and it kills interest for people to get into the game because of the expense. It is NOT expensive to produce these models, so a price drop would sell more models and help with profitability.
2) Interact more with the community, and keep open lines of communication. How hard is it to answer simple rules questions or discrepancies? I am all about the roll off, but honestly some rules just need clarification. Drop the cone of silence. Have an active FB page and Twitter feed to answer rules questions or promote new things.
They could also do well with listening to the community for things that the game is trending about and make adjustments as necessary. I could go on with this topic forever, but will close it with, listen to your customers, we know what's up.
3) Make editions last longer. Stop nerfing units, instead add new units to counter 'broken' or 'op' units. I personally believe you should either buff existing units, leave them the same, or do nothing to them at all. This will ensure that the people who spend money on a particular unit now, won't feel like they wasted their money because in the next edition it sucks.
While not really a true fix, as I don't know what their bottom line is, I know that these things are tried and true methods to keep a player base going and bring in new players. GW won't go under, but it is extremely disconcerting to see Kirby announce that he is stepping down, just ahead of dropping what I can see as awful sales figures for the year.
I'm honestly surprised. I thought IK, IG, 7th would have picked their sales up more than this. Instead it's another drop. Things are worse than I thought in Nottingham.
I'm not a hysterical type but I think these figures are disastrous and I'll try and set out why.
Despite the new release schedule and the introduction of the imperial knight which has sold like hot cakes and the increased pace of new stuff they have dropped 8% in sales. Given that the recession is now lifting and many are seeing wage increases at long last, with increasing confidence, i.e. conditions in which you would expect an uplift in trade, especially for luxury non-essentials when people think "things are looking up now I can think about that new ork army...". The strategy has failed, so far at least.
The cuts in their costs have not been reflected in their profits. They've slashed the costs of their shops and cut all over the show and ok it cost £4m but they should be looking to see a return quickly simply on lower wages.
The incredible, almost unbelievable cost of their website, I'm no expert but £4m is crazy money for a pretty simple storefront. There is nothing complex there it's just a database isn't it in effect? I can think of some answers as to why this amount was spent but I'd best not put them in writing...
Overall given improving trading conditions, immense cuts in costs and a huge attempt to change their release strategy they have failed to turn things around.
Luckily they are still in profit and not in imminent danger but the new CEO has to address the sales drop. He/she can't keep on raising prices to try and counteract the volumes. This won't work in the long run, it is suicide. They need to look at ways to shift more units, probably by restructuring their prices and looking at how they interact with their fanbase to enthuse them. They need to consider sales, promotions, etc.
What really creeps me out about all of this, is I haven't seen one honest attempt to put a positive spin on this. Not one person coming to say "lol sky if falling, been saying that for 20 years! GW too big to sink."
Sim-Life wrote: I wonder how bad the numbers would have been without 7th Ed, Codex: Space Marine, Imperial Knights and IG the staff cutting.
Honestly I don't think it would be so bad. If there was no 7th, then people wouldn't have left because 6th would be still holding value. I believe a lot of people just didn't want to buy a new version in less than 2 years. Now we have to worry 8th edition will come out in 18 months from now. Also if there was no IK we wouldn't have a $170 Canadian Kit. If there was no IG (well there is no IG) people wouldn't be dismayed from the name change. I don't think that lost sales though, but this leads into Tyranids and Space Marines and Orks. Price Hikes. While it wasn't a yearly price increase the new kit prices are just insane. Especially the Imperial Knight like I said before. Look at the Orks insane prices.
So insane prices, with a new rule set, which had a price increase, people are just fed up and GW finally priced people out of the hobby.
BUT that shouldn't be a big deal anyway. We were not GW target audience anyway, so the money lost from us shouldn't matter. GW didn't want us to buy in the first place. Well that is how I feel. GW doesn't want me and don't care. I am sure others feel like that as well. Now I wonder if these share holders care.
I think the current version of GW is cooked. The only way the company is going to turn around is with drastic change from the top down. When the new CEO comes in, the company needs to be treated like it was bought out and redone from the top down, board of directors included. This is the only way things will change.
However, as the board like their cushy checks and don't really want to make any changes, I suspect they will make the worst possible decisions. We'll see more rushed product, higher prices, more 1 man stores and probably more GW only models. I expect the non-UK market will drop substantially over the next year as Kirby ramps up his war on FLGS.
They need to keep Kirby around to assist the new CEO with financial and business advice.
New guy: "What do you think we should do to reach out to our customers?"
Kirby: "Not sure what that means, but just produce something blockish and ugly and they will buy it."
NG: ".... Yeah... I'm just going to do the opposite and ask the market directly. Let me just check the foru-where's the site's forum section."
Kirby: "We don't have one."
NG: "Right... how much did you pay for this?"
Kirby: "Around 4 million"
NG: "4 Million and you couldn't afford a forum... "
Take it back. GW is siting on a sitcom gold mine if they just tapped into it.
Kilkrazy wrote: Yes, there certainly are various elements of GW's behaviour that seem logically contradictory.
I certainly agree that a lot more people would have bought the 7th edition rules if GW had released the rulebook only, prices say £20 or more likely £25, as an option to the whole set at £50.
Just bought the 7th edition rulebook and it is the only full size one I have ever bought exactly because they split it into 3. I found the others too unwieldy with the pics and fluff all in one book. It's essentially the same product as before, but much easier to wield. The rulebook is actually very well laid out [or much better than previous ones anyway] in a logical order. Even my graphic designer friend is impressed with how it has been put together.
Would I have bought the rulebook only at £25? Difficult to say, but I certainly hadn't been looking for the mini-rulebook on Ebay prior to my purchase. I like looking at pictures of models and reading fluff, and I think the split into 3 was a good decision. I've now got a couple of [admittedly very geeky] coffee table books that I will flick through every now and then. Also, for new entrants to the hobby, the fluff and pics books would be pretty essential.
Having said all that, I completely understand why someone who had bought the main 6th edition rulebook would be annoyed. Another friend bought the limited edition rules, and, while I have little sympathy for people that buy limited edition stuff, I can understand why he is reluctant to move over to 7th.
I'm sure someone mentioned this before in this thread. Go back in time ask all the worlds AD&D fans if TSR would fall. What do you think the answer was? The same as most people here would say about GW...No. The difference is GW is at a point where it can still learn from its current marketing mistakes. However as with all people of the world common sense and ego are inversely proportional. I’m no different, just in this case I’m on the outside looking in. Now GW is not going fall today or the next year but the current trend is not looking so good in my area for GW products. My FLGS has only seen 3 40K games played since the new rules. It used to be 5-6 on a Friday night. GW product sales are extremely down according to the owners. They have only sold the new rules and the new box set with the mini rulebook. (3 rulebooks and 6 box sets) In 3 months they have not sold any new units, tanks etc. Other regional local stores aren’t doing much better.
I’ve heard rumors of areas doing really well, I don’t doubt it. It’s just the grim outlook locally for me makes it kind of doubtful. Do I want this game to die hell no. I invested a lot of time and money in this game. My area can’t seem to find a common ground for an alternate game and I hate warmahoards. GW can turn it around, maybe even close to their glory days, if the ask themselves some hard questions and make some hard to swallow decisions.
Despite some easy frags on our wallets : Imperial Knights, 7th edition...
The next financial report will be dreadful.
The "GW had <insert huge release here> yet the numbers are bad" argument comes out every year. I don't really buy it. Sure, it may have some effect but generally every year there is something "big" coming up which will cause splash and get people buy (or so GW hopes).
Look at this list of GW financial periods, respective revenues and notable releases:
Autumn 2011: £62.7 Necrons...ummm...anything else?
Spring 2012: £68.3 New Citadel paint range, Vampire Counts
Autumn 2012: £67.5 6th edition 40k and starter set
Spring 2013: £67.1 release schedule accelerated, new Tau codex (and Riptide!), Specialist games sell-off
Autumn 2013: £60.5 Space Marines & Eldar
Spring 2014: £63 Imperial Knight, Tyranids, Wood Elves, 7th edition 40k (one week, two if you count pre-orders).
As you can see, overall impact of any single release is actually pretty limited. Period with 6th edition 40k had actually slower sales than preceding financial period.
How does GW get new players? Word of mouth. Who supplies that word of mouth? Veteran players. Who's GW pushing away? Veteran players. Who's now likely to have bad things to say about GW? Veteran players.
No research about its customers so they really have no idea who's buying their stuff or why.
No communication to customers.
Growing too expensive.
Public bullying of other companies and independent stores.
Downward trend in sales despite cost cuts and huge releases.
Releases that have actually alienated many customers.
I frankly don't see a long future for them. Can they pull up? Absolutely. Will they? Their attitude suggests otherwise.
Right, but the release of a new edition is actually very important. In other words, if you aren't selling the rules, they aren't playing your game. If they aren't playing your game, they aren't using your armies. If they aren't using your armies they aren't buying codex and supplements. If they aren't buying codex and supplements they won't be getting those shiny new models.
The bad launch of an edition can kill the entire edition. This is after people have been steadily trickling out of the hobby after the last several editions with no effort made to get people back in.
Especially since they don't know who they would target to try and get back in and they even bragged about it. "People are buying our stuff! We don't know who and we don't know how. Couldn't care less."
As you can see, overall impact of any single release is actually pretty limited. Period with 6th edition 40k had actually slower sales than preceding financial period.
Autumn 2011: £62.7 Necrons...ummm...anything else?
Autumn 2012: £67.5 6th edition 40k and starter set
Huh?
AFAIK, when you are comparing financial periods, you compare the same period from the preceding year.
I think this annual report can be a good thing for the company.
You can spin this as much as you want to the public, but behind closed doors, there is no way to sugar coat this to the rest of the Board of Directors.
A nearly 10% drop in sales during the time you released 7th edition, space marines, and Imperial guard? These are your bread and butter releases. THE flagship products of your flagship range.
You can't spin this. You can't ignore it. It's dangling in your face, exposed for the world to see.
Now is the time for them to address the problems of recent years and DO SOMETHING.
Yea I'd guess GW has less than 4 years left in its current configuration. Corporate leadership has no idea why they are losing customers, their practices prove that.
I don't see them making the immediate, sweeping changes that are needed for them to survive intact.
Going public made a bunch of people a lot of money, at the expense of the hobby. It couldve worked with better leadership, oh well.
WH40k is too strong of an IP to disappear completely; but it is quite possible it will be dethroned as the king of TT wargames when the dust has settled.
Ultra-capitalism is a terrible thing. It rewards greed and sociopathic behaviors.
sand.zzz wrote: Yea I'd guess GW has less than 4 years left in its current configuration. Corporate leadership has no idea why they are losing customers, their practices prove that.
I don't see them making the immediate, sweeping changes that are needed for them to survive intact.
Going public made a bunch of people a lot of money, at the expense of the hobby. It couldve worked with better leadership, oh well.
WH40k is too strong of an IP to disappear completely; but it is quite possible it will be dethroned as the king of TT wargames when the dust has settled.
Ultra-capitalism is a terrible thing. It rewards greed and sociopathic behaviors.
I don't see how GW is being rewarded in this case. They're in a decline.
I think he means is that it gets the mind focused on profits as fast as possible.
The infamous quote about how they don't know their market is the perfect example. They start producing models like crazy and don't know why some sell and others don't. But it doesn't matter because one of them is selling so they'll make more of that and sell it.
That's something that will bother me all day long. They don't bother to check their consumer base to find out why things aren't selling. They don't know if people like the Riptide for the model of if the rules are driving the sales. They don't know that people aren't buying mutilators because the model is ugly and has terrible rules.
This is what kills me. Such an easy fix to the problem from a vocal fan base. Just survey some people and bring those surveys to the next studio meeting.
I just wanted to see a drop in sales, a little turbulence. I didn't want to hear the captain saying that cutting out on radar and landing gear has steadied out the payouts on all those lawsuits.
AFAIK, when you are comparing financial periods, you compare the same period from the preceding year.
Usually yes, however seasonal effect for GW seems to be quite limited. The "autumn" period covers Christmas, but they're seldom noticeably bigger than "spring" periods.
MWHistorian wrote: I don't see how GW is being rewarded in this case. They're in a decline.
They aren't, but GW management doesn't care. Short-sighted greed is very rewarding, as long as you're in the right position to benefit from it. The company is just a means to an end, paying their inflated salaries. If keeping the company profitable and the paychecks coming in for another year or two means running the company into the ground then that's perfectly fine with them, they'll just sell their stock before the final crash and move on to loot the next company.
If you ask me what they need to do to fix things are:
1) Price things better. There is zero reason for the current prices. Look at Mantic (do not bring up quality as an argument here), Warlord or Perry and do the same. If they want the game to be large that's fine, but then price the figures reasonably so it doesn't cost several hundred to play at a normal points level. When I can buy 40 figures for $40 that are equal to or better than GW's quality (Perry) versus $40 for 10 like GW puts out, there's a problem. WHFB should be prices similar to Kings of War, Hail Caesar et all and Perry Miniatures. 40k should be built around the size of Bolt Action as the normal/recommended size, where a tank is a large chunk of a normal army and if you want say more tanks, play a higher point game.
Some birdbrain on BOLS (BTW if you want to see justification and "It's just trolls", go there) tried to argue that the reason they can't do this is because they're a public company.
2) Balance the fething rules. Take the risk and work on 8th edition 40k, and rewrite it from the ground up, using something like Warmahordes as the basis for how it should read (i.e. clear and concise, with every faction getting updates at once instead of spreading it out over years). Hire Alessio as a contractor (if he'll do it, that is) to make solid rules that work, or hell if they really want to pretend they're a miniature company not a game company, get rid of the game part entirely and license Mantic's Warpath as the new version of 40k, and work on new army lists for it.
3) Engage the community. The fact that they are PROUD of not engaging in market research is a blatant "WTF?!" moment. You do not dictate to customers, you let cusotmers dictate to you within reason. Get a forum again, get a blog or something for the designers to have something like the old Chapter Approved, with musings and notes and the like from the designers, maybe even scenario ideas (forge the narrative!) or "Try this in friendly games" kind of optional house rules (like back in 3rd edition, long before Index Astartes there was a drafted White Scars army list custom made for Paul "Fat Bloke" Sawyer and reprinted to allow players to experiment with it in home games). Have them on Twitter where they can answer questions (a la WoW).
But I seriously doubt they'll do anything to fix it. They seem to think the problem is "just" that less people are buying, and don't really care *why* they aren't buying. Even a new CEO is likely to just be a Krony and will keep things the same.
Some more anecdotal evidence I'd like to toss into the mix...
Miniwargaming's Youtube channel and website are more popular than ever, and the demand for more 40k content (particularly the Battle Reports) is leading the charge.
Now, this may just be due to the quality of the channel, but if you read the Youtube comments, it seems like there are a lot of new people getting into 40k.
But I agree, the GW price gouging is getting a bit ridiculous..
Without getting into the details about drawing any sort of conclusion using a single youtube channel, your comment about seeing a number of new players may be completely neutralized by all the people leaving the game you don't hear about.
Dulu wrote: Some more anecdotal evidence I'd like to toss into the mix...
Miniwargaming's Youtube channel and website are more popular than ever, and the demand for more 40k content (particularly the Battle Reports) is leading the charge.
Now, this may just be due to the quality of the channel, but if you read the Youtube comments, it seems like there are a lot of new people getting into 40k.
But I agree, the GW price gouging is getting a bit ridiculous..
5 Space Marines for $39 or whatever is a joke.
And honestly, I don't understand WHY a new player would get into 40k, because there's no reason when there are other games. It goes back to the old issue that if 40k is the dominant game, then people will play it because it's the dominant game. One of the stores in my area is like that - it still has almost all 40k, to where they don't stock other games anymore because they weren't selling (seriously, they don't sell Malifaux or Warmachine stuff anymore in the store, they've never stocked Infinity because nobody wanted it). So someone new sees people playing 40k, and wants to start; it's almost like it's 1998 all over again, because they aren't exposed to the other options since all a new player coming there sees being played is 40k.
As far as a game goes, 40k is almost complete garbage and nearly unplayable outside of house rules and negotiations. if GW fixed that and priced better, then they could absolutely crush anyone else. It's like what they do with their paints. If Citadel paints were in 17mL dropper bottles like Vallejo or Army Painter, they would rule the roost by being high quality, at a decent price for a decent amount (even if, all things considered, they charged a bit more e.g. $4 for 17ml compared to 3 and change for Vallejo), and ubiquitous. Instead what do they do? They charge the most and give the least amount of paint out of all the others, instead of obliterating their competition with a high quality product at a reasonable price. I would buy nothing but Citadel if they were $4 for 17ml, based on quality and ease of finding it (every game store has a Citadel rack), but at $4 for 12ml I don't buy any because it's not good value. Story of GW's life, basically.
That's the underlying issue. They have competition because they act from arrogance, instead of from practicality. They should be undercutting everybody else, offering promotions and deals and the whole hog to get people to play 40k instead of other games, and what they lose in profit per miniature sold they make up in volume because 40k is ubiquitous again AND affordable, so they would push their competitors out of business. Instead, everything is priced so high that they've allowed the competition to start eating up market share at the cost of their own, and are too blind to see it.
Dulu wrote: Some more anecdotal evidence I'd like to toss into the mix...
Miniwargaming's Youtube channel and website are more popular than ever, and the demand for more 40k content (particularly the Battle Reports) is leading the charge.
Now, this may just be due to the quality of the channel, but if you read the Youtube comments, it seems like there are a lot of new people getting into 40k.
But I agree, the GW price gouging is getting a bit ridiculous..
5 Space Marines for $39 or whatever is a joke.
And honestly, I don't understand WHY a new player would get into 40k, because there's no reason when there are other games. It goes back to the old issue that if 40k is the dominant game, then people will play it because it's the dominant game. One of the stores in my area is like that - it still has almost all 40k, to where they don't stock other games anymore because they weren't selling (seriously, they don't sell Malifaux or Warmachine stuff anymore in the store, they've never stocked Infinity because nobody wanted it). So someone new sees people playing 40k, and wants to start; it's almost like it's 1998 all over again, because they aren't exposed to the other options since all a new player coming there sees being played is 40k.
As far as a game goes, 40k is almost complete garbage and nearly unplayable outside of house rules and negotiations. if GW fixed that and priced better, then they could absolutely crush anyone else. It's like what they do with their paints. If Citadel paints were in 17mL dropper bottles like Vallejo or Army Painter, they would rule the roost by being high quality, at a decent price for a decent amount (even if, all things considered, they charged a bit more e.g. $4 for 17ml compared to 3 and change for Vallejo), and ubiquitous. Instead what do they do? They charge the most and give the least amount of paint out of all the others, instead of obliterating their competition with a high quality product at a reasonable price. I would buy nothing but Citadel if they were $4 for 17ml, based on quality and ease of finding it (every game store has a Citadel rack), but at $4 for 12ml I don't buy any because it's not good value. Story of GW's life, basically.
That's the underlying issue. They have competition because they act from arrogance, instead of from practicality. They should be undercutting everybody else, offering promotions and deals and the whole hog to get people to play 40k instead of other games, and what they lose in profit per miniature sold they make up in volume because 40k is ubiquitous again AND affordable, so they would push their competitors out of business. Instead, everything is priced so high that they've allowed the competition to start eating up market share at the cost of their own, and are too blind to see it.
I think part of it may be that Warhammer, and Games Workshop by Proxy, has a name that people recognize more than ever.
Video games like Age of Reckoning, Dawn of War, Space Marine, Fire Warrior, Eternal Crusade, etc.. Have built a lot of hype around the Warhammer universe. Even if it's an inferior product, people want to play as the Space Marine, the Tau, etc from their other games.
I'm pretty sure everything I said was "facts," as are a number of other comments in this thread, both for and against. I would advise against claiming the banner of veracity too hard.
