Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

hobojebus wrote:
Well GW Arnt Apple no matter how much they wish they were.

And I'm sure with t he recent 23% drop Apple's going to be doing market research to find out why.

Look I used to be a fanboy to I get it, but you can like something without having to declare everything is awesome.

GW is not a well run company it's a laughing stock across the net, roundtree got handed a sinking ship and has a damn hard time ahead of him to avoid the fast approaching cliff he faces.

I think Rountree is doing a jolly good job, and there is every sign he is turning the ship pretty well.

All GW have to do is stabilise the falling sales.

hobojebus wrote:


GW is not a well run company it's a laughing stock across the net, roundtree got handed a sinking ship and has a damn hard time ahead of him to avoid the fast approaching cliff he faces.

What cliff? The same cliff for the past 20 years that GW was supposedly going over? That said Mr Roundtree is doing a good job and it will take time for people to trust in GW again. We all make mistakes. We all deserve second chances. If GW doesn't deserve a second chance then why is that person in a GW forum?

Davor wrote:

hobojebus wrote:


GW is not a well run company it's a laughing stock across the net, roundtree got handed a sinking ship and has a damn hard time ahead of him to avoid the fast approaching cliff he faces.

What cliff? The same cliff for the past 20 years that GW was supposedly going over? That said Mr Roundtree is doing a good job and it will take time for people to trust in GW again. We all make mistakes. We all deserve second chances. If GW doesn't deserve a second chance then why is that person in a GW forum?

This common argument conveniently ignores their sales figures. From the late 90s to the mid 00s, it was hard to say GW was approaching a cliff. Their revenue and profit were climbing every year and they dominated the market. However, the past 5 years have basically been the opposite. Falling revenue, profit and market share while making new excuses for it every year and doing nothing to find out why. Just because people who don't know anything about economics said GW was failing in 1996 doesn't somehow make them immune to bankruptcy in 2016 and beyond. In fact, what people have been saying for the last 20 years is irrelevant, financial statements are the only things that matter. Why don't you go take a look at those for the last 5 years and then tell me how there's no cliff in sight.

Gdub is producing some beautiful models for the AoS line.

The Orruks and now the Sylvanth are beautiful. I would love to get these models, but the price! One model in the Sylvanth of a person riding some beast is $265US. Seven models for $733? I almost think the three models for $115 almost sounds reasonable.

There's no way I can justify spending that much money.

 Phydox wrote:
Gdub is producing some beautiful models for the AoS line.

The O One model in the Sylvanth of a person riding some beast is $265US. .

It's $130US, since I have to pay $160 Canadian. You sure you were not on the Aussie site?

It's $130 US, maybe. In NZ/Aus? They get regularly boned. So with FLGS or online retailer sale cost $104 US.

 Toofast wrote:

Davor wrote:

hobojebus wrote:


GW is not a well run company it's a laughing stock across the net, roundtree got handed a sinking ship and has a damn hard time ahead of him to avoid the fast approaching cliff he faces.

What cliff? The same cliff for the past 20 years that GW was supposedly going over? That said Mr Roundtree is doing a good job and it will take time for people to trust in GW again. We all make mistakes. We all deserve second chances. If GW doesn't deserve a second chance then why is that person in a GW forum?

This common argument conveniently ignores their sales figures. From the late 90s to the mid 00s, it was hard to say GW was approaching a cliff. Their revenue and profit were climbing every year and they dominated the market. However, the past 5 years have basically been the opposite. Falling revenue, profit and market share while making new excuses for it every year and doing nothing to find out why. Just because people who don't know anything about economics said GW was failing in 1996 doesn't somehow make them immune to bankruptcy in 2016 and beyond. In fact, what people have been saying for the last 20 years is irrelevant, financial statements are the only things that matter. Why don't you go take a look at those for the last 5 years and then tell me how there's no cliff in sight.

People also ignore the fact they put out a profit warning this year.

Total war saved their bacon but they can't rely on licence fees and royalties forever.

GW not only needs to get back the 14% drop in model sales they need to expand and that's a tall order as prices continue to go up making their competition all the more appealing.

Davor wrote:

 Phydox wrote:
Gdub is producing some beautiful models for the AoS line.

The O One model in the Sylvanth of a person riding some beast is $265US. .

It's $130US, since I have to pay $160 Canadian. You sure you were not on the Aussie site?

It's $225 here, he's on the NZ site.

hobojebus wrote:

 Toofast wrote:

Davor wrote:

hobojebus wrote:


GW is not a well run company it's a laughing stock across the net, roundtree got handed a sinking ship and has a damn hard time ahead of him to avoid the fast approaching cliff he faces.

What cliff? The same cliff for the past 20 years that GW was supposedly going over? That said Mr Roundtree is doing a good job and it will take time for people to trust in GW again. We all make mistakes. We all deserve second chances. If GW doesn't deserve a second chance then why is that person in a GW forum?

This common argument conveniently ignores their sales figures. From the late 90s to the mid 00s, it was hard to say GW was approaching a cliff. Their revenue and profit were climbing every year and they dominated the market. However, the past 5 years have basically been the opposite. Falling revenue, profit and market share while making new excuses for it every year and doing nothing to find out why. Just because people who don't know anything about economics said GW was failing in 1996 doesn't somehow make them immune to bankruptcy in 2016 and beyond. In fact, what people have been saying for the last 20 years is irrelevant, financial statements are the only things that matter. Why don't you go take a look at those for the last 5 years and then tell me how there's no cliff in sight.

People also ignore the fact they put out a profit warning this year.

Total war saved their bacon but they can't rely on licence fees and royalties forever.

GW not only needs to get back the 14% drop in model sales they need to expand and that's a tall order as prices continue to go up making their competition all the more appealing.

What part of they are still making a profit and not close to bankruptcy at all? They are in the black. Yes sales are down from each year, yes they are not growing, but still no where near the cliff at all. Even if they only made one penny profit, it is no where near the cliff at all. Companies go bankrupt when they are in the red. GW is no where close to this. Are they in the middle of the fields raking in dough? Not like they use to. There are still nowhere near this cliff either. Even without these royalties, GW wouldn't have met their profits for share holders and it still wouldn't be a big deal. By that I mean it's not a big deal that they are close to the cliff. Once GW is in the red, then yes they are close to the cliff.

So no, GW is nowhere near the cliff at all. They have just made changes hopefully for the better, but that will take time. Just like how it took time when GW made changes for the worse, now it will take time to see the changes that GW made for the better now. GW is not going anywhere anytime soon.

So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

 jonolikespie wrote:
So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

Yes, even if it was one dollar profit they are not near the cliff. What has to happen for a company to go over? Be in dept correct? Hey I could be wrong so anyone please correct me. I am no major in business but I thought for a company to go bankrupt it is because they are in the red usually and OWE MONEY to others. Right now GW doesn't owe money to anyone and yes their profits are shrinking each year, but no where close to being bankrupt. So that is why I say they are not close to the edge. After all this talk we are having was happening over 16 years ago. It didn't apply back then anymore than it applies today. Back then sales were getting less and less as well.

What was the profit 10 million for the year or 1/2 year? Not sure if that is in pounds or dollars, but still that is a lot of coin. So while profits are not as big as before or how the shareholders would like, PP and other companies would love to have these profits that GW has now. So if it's good enough for PP and other companies, then that would mean GW is no where near the cliff. I

jonolikespie wrote:So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

In the scenario you've imagined (revenue drop of 50% for 10 consecutive years), a company earning $1 million a year would drop to less than $1,000 a year (or $500m drop to $500k). So yes, if a company shrinks to one thousandths of its size, that's a pretty big cliff, because everything about the company including its ability to continue as a going concern would be unrecognizable.

If this happened to GW, they'd probably be unable to pay for the CEO's salary, even if they fired every other person in the company

hobojebus wrote:GW not only needs to get back the 14% drop in model sales they need to expand and that's a tall order as prices continue to go up making their competition all the more appealing.

The flip side of this is that GW's most significant competitor in mindshare and dollars spent (Privateer Press) is becoming more and more like GW, especially in terms of pricing. In a lot of cases, the prices are actually higher for PP, for arguably inferior models. You could talk about Mantic, but it's so small that it's barely a rounding error compared to GW's revenues (and from there, the tabletop wargame environments fall off a cliff in terms of revenues). You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

 Talys wrote:
You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

Yes it's a different game where you don't have to paint and model, BUT allot of people still convert and repaint their minis anyways. So it's the same there.

Also while Xwing is oranges, and 40K is apples (no pun intended) they are both fruit (the same gaming hobby, playing with miniatures) and I am sure a lot of people left 40K/GW to Xwing for a clear concise ruleset they can play with little fuss setting up a game. So yes they can be compared. Money going to Xwing is not going to GW.

People pay the PP price because PP is designed explicitly for tournament play.

Those same people won't pay GW prices for GW games because GW games are not designed for tournament play.

The culture is what it is. The culture is fixated on competition.

If GW were to create a world esport league for AOS and 40k with a world championship and prizes like magic does, people would be paying GW prices in a heartbeat, just like games like Magic have shown us.

I also know the competitive xwing players drop more on xwing to get all the cards they need than many gw armies and they do so happily because again... its to compete in world championship xwing.

For many competitive players, the quality of the models doesn't matter. The quality of the game and the rules and how well the company supports world wide rankings matters most.

IMO if GW made a competition-centric ruleset based around world championship miniature wargames battles, they would be completely dominating the market right now because on top of that their models are the best.

 auticus wrote:

The culture is what it is. The culture is fixated on competition.

IMO if GW made a competition-centric ruleset based around world championship miniature wargames battles, they would be completely dominating the market right now because on top of that their models are the best.

You know, GW is making more and more sense now. GW wants to have fun, there is no need to prove who's metophorical nerd weiner is bigger. Hell look at PP, their page 5, Play like you got a pair. Like really? Not sure if that is in v3, but one of the reasons why I never got into Warmahordes. I just want to play for fun, don't need to prove anything. I guess that is why I am trying to get back into 40K now, just want to play for fun, not play a make believe sport competition. I think I partially understand GW now.

Now back to your quote, I don't think having wold championships (which is a great idea though) would make GW dominate the market. I don't think it's competition that culture is fixated on, but just a lack of structure and fairness. People are just tired of GW not having clear concise rules and balance books in the game, people left for others to have it. PP has the balance and fairness, Xwing has the balance and fairness. With having balance and fairness people are on a level field and that is what a lot of want in pick up games with strangers. An easier time to game and have more games.

The thing is; you can still have fun with a competitive game. There's literally no reason not to make a game that works competitively.

X-wing is great fun, and can be played entirely casually.

Davor wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

Yes, even if it was one dollar profit they are not near the cliff.

No, that's not how it works at all. You and RoperRG should stop making business-based arguments, for the sake of the children.

 Baragash wrote:

Davor wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

Yes, even if it was one dollar profit they are not near the cliff.

No, that's not how it works at all. You and RoperRG should stop making business-based arguments, for the sake of the children.

If you'd like to point out where I've indicated GW is thriving, I'd be happy to. All I've stated is that they're not defunct yet, and pointed out some pretty obvious non-sequiteurs.
For example, using similar logic to others here, I could claim that the new Sylvaneth stuff being sold out on pre-orders is proof that AoS is really popular and GW must be doing well. But I couldn't do it with a straight face.

Davor wrote:

 Talys wrote:
You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

Yes it's a different game where you don't have to paint and model, BUT allot of people still convert and repaint their minis anyways. So it's the same there.

Also while Xwing is oranges, and 40K is apples (no pun intended) they are both fruit (the same gaming hobby, playing with miniatures) and I am sure a lot of people left 40K/GW to Xwing for a clear concise ruleset they can play with little fuss setting up a game. So yes they can be compared. Money going to Xwing is not going to GW.

Come to the ffg x-wing and armada forums and most will tell you how they've switched from 40k, some because they no longer have to paint but most because it's a better game from a company that actively listens to its players and tries to fix problems in months not years.

It's also cheaper for the £750 it'd cost to make a 2k force you can buy three factions in xwing.

And we have an active conversion and painting sub forum.

When 7th came out a good portion of those that left started playing x-wing.

RoperPG wrote:

 Baragash wrote:

Davor wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

Yes, even if it was one dollar profit they are not near the cliff.

No, that's not how it works at all. You and RoperRG should stop making business-based arguments, for the sake of the children.

If you'd like to point out where I've indicated GW is thriving, I'd be happy to. All I've stated is that they're not defunct yet, and pointed out some pretty obvious non-sequiteurs.
For example, using similar logic to others here, I could claim that the new Sylvaneth stuff being sold out on pre-orders is proof that AoS is really popular and GW must be doing well. But I couldn't do it with a straight face.

Well said. Who says we are defending GW.

hobojebus wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Talys wrote:
You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

Yes it's a different game where you don't have to paint and model, BUT allot of people still convert and repaint their minis anyways. So it's the same there.

Also while Xwing is oranges, and 40K is apples (no pun intended) they are both fruit (the same gaming hobby, playing with miniatures) and I am sure a lot of people left 40K/GW to Xwing for a clear concise ruleset they can play with little fuss setting up a game. So yes they can be compared. Money going to Xwing is not going to GW.

Come to the ffg x-wing and armada forums and most will tell you how they've switched from 40k, some because they no longer have to paint but most because it's a better game from a company that actively listens to its players and tries to fix problems in months not years.

It's also cheaper for the £750 it'd cost to make a 2k force you can buy three factions in xwing.

And we have an active conversion and painting sub forum.

When 7th came out a good portion of those that left started playing x-wing.

There is many reasons why people have left 40K/GW. I would love to discuss this, but that will be off topic.

All I am saying is GW is not going anywhere any time soon. Yes they eventually can be gone but that is not now or in 5 years from now.

A few comments say I am wrong. Great, I don't mind being wrong, but please prove me wrong. Just saying I am wrong doesn't mean I am. Again, I have said, GW is in the black, no where near bankruptcy and don't owe any money to anyone. So how is GW going off the cliff?

Yes they are heading towards the cliff, but being 100 km away when before they were 200 km away doesn't mean they are still anywhere close to the cliff. Are they heading in that direction? Yes I agree, but still no where near of falling off.

I think AOS's future is much more bright with the General's Handbook in place, it should greatly help make the game sustainable. I also appreciate that the rules are cheap-to-free. If GW isn't going to put premium effort into the rules then I don't want to pay premium prices- that's perfectly fine! Really, the way AOS is being handled rules-wise is quite optimal, especially compared to 40k.

hobojebus wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Talys wrote:
You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

Yes it's a different game where you don't have to paint and model, BUT allot of people still convert and repaint their minis anyways. So it's the same there.

Also while Xwing is oranges, and 40K is apples (no pun intended) they are both fruit (the same gaming hobby, playing with miniatures) and I am sure a lot of people left 40K/GW to Xwing for a clear concise ruleset they can play with little fuss setting up a game. So yes they can be compared. Money going to Xwing is not going to GW.

Come to the ffg x-wing and armada forums and most will tell you how they've switched from 40k, some because they no longer have to paint but most because it's a better game from a company that actively listens to its players and tries to fix problems in months not years.

It's also cheaper for the £750 it'd cost to make a 2k force you can buy three factions in xwing.

And we have an active conversion and painting sub forum.

When 7th came out a good portion of those that left started playing x-wing.

Xwing may be a great game, but if you dont have any interest in either star wars or dogfighting games then it really will not "scratch the itch" at all. I would never go to xwing because I dont like dogfighting and spaceships, it does not matter if it is the best game ever made, its not a fantasy game.

Davor wrote:

RoperPG wrote:

 Baragash wrote:

Davor wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

Yes, even if it was one dollar profit they are not near the cliff.

No, that's not how it works at all. You and RoperRG should stop making business-based arguments, for the sake of the children.

If you'd like to point out where I've indicated GW is thriving, I'd be happy to. All I've stated is that they're not defunct yet, and pointed out some pretty obvious non-sequiteurs.
For example, using similar logic to others here, I could claim that the new Sylvaneth stuff being sold out on pre-orders is proof that AoS is really popular and GW must be doing well. But I couldn't do it with a straight face.

Well said. Who says we are defending GW.

hobojebus wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Talys wrote:
You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

Yes it's a different game where you don't have to paint and model, BUT allot of people still convert and repaint their minis anyways. So it's the same there.

Also while Xwing is oranges, and 40K is apples (no pun intended) they are both fruit (the same gaming hobby, playing with miniatures) and I am sure a lot of people left 40K/GW to Xwing for a clear concise ruleset they can play with little fuss setting up a game. So yes they can be compared. Money going to Xwing is not going to GW.

Come to the ffg x-wing and armada forums and most will tell you how they've switched from 40k, some because they no longer have to paint but most because it's a better game from a company that actively listens to its players and tries to fix problems in months not years.

It's also cheaper for the £750 it'd cost to make a 2k force you can buy three factions in xwing.

And we have an active conversion and painting sub forum.

When 7th came out a good portion of those that left started playing x-wing.

There is many reasons why people have left 40K/GW. I would love to discuss this, but that will be off topic.

All I am saying is GW is not going anywhere any time soon. Yes they eventually can be gone but that is not now or in 5 years from now.

A few comments say I am wrong. Great, I don't mind being wrong, but please prove me wrong. Just saying I am wrong doesn't mean I am. Again, I have said, GW is in the black, no where near bankruptcy and don't owe any money to anyone. So how is GW going off the cliff?

Yes they are heading towards the cliff, but being 100 km away when before they were 200 km away doesn't mean they are still anywhere close to the cliff. Are they heading in that direction? Yes I agree, but still no where near of falling off.

You have to remember they are a public company making profits isn't enough they have to keep the share price high or people will sell their shares and move on.

GW has kept shareholders by paying stupid high dividends the last few years but they had to borrow money to do that, that's not sustainable when your free capital is shrinking year on year.

There is a point of no return and each year with lower profits gets them closer.

If a private company just makes a profit of a dollar that's bad but they've paid everyone, if a public company does the same then people sell their shares and the company folds because it's now worth pennies on the pound and the sharks will come in buy it cheap and asset strip it.

GW's efforts so far have been half hearted the social media attempt is a joke, the army starters were a good idea but implementation is again poor not all the boxes are of the same value so ad mech gets a great deal but sw don't, again half hearted.

The two big issues are price and bad rules balance, while rules take a while to fix price is something that could be addressed near instantly yet every week we still get the same insane prices for toy soldiers.

Confidence in the financial sector is already low regarding gw, newspapers financial sections are blasting them for their performance and when that happens it's bad.

Not to mention actual shareholders have been writing about how worried they are.

There's literally no reason to have a positive outlook on the state of the company.

hobojebus wrote:

Davor wrote:

RoperPG wrote:

 Baragash wrote:

Davor wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
So.... if a company were to lose 50% of their revenue year on year for a decade and show no signs of stopping this, but made one dollar profit this year, they would still be 'nowhere near the cliff' because they are in the black, even though the trend continuing would mean next year they would be unable to cover an entire 50% of their costs?

Yes, even if it was one dollar profit they are not near the cliff.

No, that's not how it works at all. You and RoperRG should stop making business-based arguments, for the sake of the children.

If you'd like to point out where I've indicated GW is thriving, I'd be happy to. All I've stated is that they're not defunct yet, and pointed out some pretty obvious non-sequiteurs.
For example, using similar logic to others here, I could claim that the new Sylvaneth stuff being sold out on pre-orders is proof that AoS is really popular and GW must be doing well. But I couldn't do it with a straight face.

Well said. Who says we are defending GW.

hobojebus wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Talys wrote:
You could argue for X-Wing, but it's a very different sort of hobby -- it focuses on a game with prepainted gamepieces, rather than collections of miniatures that you model and paint.

Yes it's a different game where you don't have to paint and model, BUT allot of people still convert and repaint their minis anyways. So it's the same there.

Also while Xwing is oranges, and 40K is apples (no pun intended) they are both fruit (the same gaming hobby, playing with miniatures) and I am sure a lot of people left 40K/GW to Xwing for a clear concise ruleset they can play with little fuss setting up a game. So yes they can be compared. Money going to Xwing is not going to GW.

Come to the ffg x-wing and armada forums and most will tell you how they've switched from 40k, some because they no longer have to paint but most because it's a better game from a company that actively listens to its players and tries to fix problems in months not years.

It's also cheaper for the £750 it'd cost to make a 2k force you can buy three factions in xwing.

And we have an active conversion and painting sub forum.

When 7th came out a good portion of those that left started playing x-wing.

There is many reasons why people have left 40K/GW. I would love to discuss this, but that will be off topic.

All I am saying is GW is not going anywhere any time soon. Yes they eventually can be gone but that is not now or in 5 years from now.

A few comments say I am wrong. Great, I don't mind being wrong, but please prove me wrong. Just saying I am wrong doesn't mean I am. Again, I have said, GW is in the black, no where near bankruptcy and don't owe any money to anyone. So how is GW going off the cliff?

Yes they are heading towards the cliff, but being 100 km away when before they were 200 km away doesn't mean they are still anywhere close to the cliff. Are they heading in that direction? Yes I agree, but still no where near of falling off.

You have to remember they are a public company making profits isn't enough they have to keep the share price high or people will sell their shares and move on.

GW has kept shareholders by paying stupid high dividends the last few years but they had to borrow money to do that, that's not sustainable when your free capital is shrinking year on year.

There is a point of no return and each year with lower profits gets them closer.

If a private company just makes a profit of a dollar that's bad but they've paid everyone, if a public company does the same then people sell their shares and the company folds because it's now worth pennies on the pound and the sharks will come in buy it cheap and asset strip it.

GW's efforts so far have been half hearted the social media attempt is a joke, the army starters were a good idea but implementation is again poor not all the boxes are of the same value so ad mech gets a great deal but sw don't, again half hearted.

The two big issues are price and bad rules balance, while rules take a while to fix price is something that could be addressed near instantly yet every week we still get the same insane prices for toy soldiers.

Confidence in the financial sector is already low regarding gw, newspapers financial sections are blasting them for their performance and when that happens it's bad.

Not to mention actual shareholders have been writing about how worried they are.

There's literally no reason to have a positive outlook on the state of the company.

Evidence? Links? I'd be genuinely interested in reading about where their shareholders rubbish the company they are invested in and actually run the real possibility of pushing their own share prices down..

I imagine this is the one he is referring to: http://www.iii.co.uk/news-opinion/richard-beddard/games-workshop-agm%3A-relentless-profit-machine


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, there was also this: http://masterminis.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/the-future-of-games-days-games.html

IIRC that 24% stock price drop came the day after a finacial report came out in which GW said the were not paying out a dividend. I think that was the first time in like a decade they did not so a lot of the investors simply dropped the stock.

 jonolikespie wrote:
I imagine this is the one he is referring to: http://www.iii.co.uk/news-opinion/richard-beddard/games-workshop-agm%3A-relentless-profit-machine


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, there was also this: http://masterminis.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/the-future-of-games-days-games.html

IIRC that 24% stock price drop came the day after a finacial report came out in which GW said the were not paying out a dividend. I think that was the first time in like a decade they did not so a lot of the investors simply dropped the stock.

Ok.. but why are we referencing a two year and nearly one year old article? These are well out of date now and the III article has shown a significant rise in their stock price? Is there anything more recent and not quite so out of date to reference against?

By any margin a company that has persistently returned 10%+ profits for a decade while maintaining it's turnover during a rather rocky trading period would be considered a success. All of that in spite of some rather bad PR.

So positives to look at:

- New CEO has started to reverse previous bad PR
- Trading has produced higher than expected margins
- Shares continue to pay dividend
- GW remains a cash rich business
- Customers seem (from usually quite hostile Dakka) to be upbeat up new GW releases

So yeah, I don't think Hobbojebus really has much of an idea of what he's talking about.

http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2015-16-Press-Statement.pdf
Their most recent financial report. Operating profit is level, but only because royalties are up.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/693116.page
There was a comment about profits for the last year to be above expectations, which is good for them but after what, half a decade of falling sales being hidden by cost cutting people are understandably a little skeptical about what the 'expectations' were.

 jonolikespie wrote:
http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2015-16-Press-Statement.pdf
Their most recent financial report. Operating profit is level, but only because royalties are up.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/693116.page
There was a comment about profits for the last year to be above expectations, which is good for them but after what, half a decade of falling sales being hidden by cost cutting people are understandably a little skeptical about what the 'expectations' were.

So all I'm really seeing here is their profits are up and above expectations, even with cost cutting and actually being intelligent enough to licence out their IP. Hobo's the sky is falling and his laughing with glee about their imminent demise are quite.. how should I put this.. stupid?

 notprop wrote:
By any margin a company that has persistently returned 10%+ profits for a decade while maintaining it's turnover during a rather rocky trading period would be considered a success. All of that in spite of some rather bad PR.

The problem is that they weren't maintaining turnover, revenue from last year was £123.1m http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/May-15-stats-final-27-July-15-with-cover.pdf

Revenue from 2006 was £115.2m http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/gw_year_end_07.pdf

Which is between £138.30 to £152.40 million with inflation.
https://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php?use%5B%5D=CPI&use%5B%5D=NOMINALEARN&year_late=2006&typeamount=115&amount=115&year_source=2006&year_result=2015

Over the past 10 years revenue appears to have declined between 15 and 29 million pounds (between ten and twenty percent from the looks of it) adjusted for inflation.

Now those were Kirby years, and it is entirely possible this 'beating expectations' will be a nice bump in revenue and Roundtree will right the ship and help GW grow again. It would be nice if he did. But they certainly were warning signs in the past decade.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

So all I'm really seeing here is their profits are up and above expectations, even with cost cutting and actually being intelligent enough to licence out their IP. Hobo's the sky is falling and his laughing with glee about their imminent demise are quite.. how should I put this.. stupid?

Maybe it is. I certainly think they are getting better. But so is the idea that there was never a problem.