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.

[EDIT]: Wrong thread. Too many windows open. Ignore.

I think GW's chief problem is that they are run by this guy:

I thought for a split second that actually was the chap running the show.
But when I looked more closely I observed the shadows and realised trhat the sun isn't shining from up his arse.

So it can't be him after all!

Adam LongWalker wrote:Andrew1975 THANK YOU! Your eloquent statements is exactly what I was going to post.

I've owned several businesses over the years. Have a few renters paying for my modeling addiction so to speak

It is always less expensive to keep your customer base than to recruit. I've have had loyal customers for +20 plus years because of quality service. You must know your market. You must always try to expand while keeping your customer base intact. But above all you must keep your customer base happy. They must feel that they are important, that they are real people, with an opinion (whether right or wrong) instead of a bar code of data.

That is IMHO GW's problem. To them we are bar codes of data, a temporary resource of income to be used and then tossed aside.

While I completely agree with the bolded text, I have to argue, again, that while it's cheaper to keep a vet than recruit a newb, the return on investment might be higher for the newb.

I'd wager that GW figures that external factors are more important to staying in the hobby than anything they do themselves. Meaning, people get married, move, get a new job, lose their gaming club, the FLGS closes, or there's simply hobby fatigue in which a gamer wants to try something new.

Conversely, there are people that are going to collect GW product no matter what they do.

So, the actual veteran market GW needs to try to woo is the intersection of "those that aren't burnt out externally" and "those that aren't on board already anyway."

So, I agree with Mystery to the extent that I think GW thinks that particular demo isn't worth catering to. I disagree in that I think that a substantial part of the problem with that demo is the way they relate. Releasing low investment product (rules, non-plastic kits, expansions), updating rules, etc, are all relatively cheap ways GW could help keep even the disparate interests of veterans satisfied. Couple that with better PR, and I think you'd see less backlash.

Polonius wrote:

Adam LongWalker wrote:Andrew1975 THANK YOU! Your eloquent statements is exactly what I was going to post.

I've owned several businesses over the years. Have a few renters paying for my modeling addiction so to speak

It is always less expensive to keep your customer base than to recruit. I've have had loyal customers for +20 plus years because of quality service. You must know your market. You must always try to expand while keeping your customer base intact. But above all you must keep your customer base happy. They must feel that they are important, that they are real people, with an opinion (whether right or wrong) instead of a bar code of data.

That is IMHO GW's problem. To them we are bar codes of data, a temporary resource of income to be used and then tossed aside.

While I completely agree with the bolded text, I have to argue, again, that while it's cheaper to keep a vet than recruit a newb, the return on investment might be higher for the newb.

I'd wager that GW figures that external factors are more important to staying in the hobby than anything they do themselves. Meaning, people get married, move, get a new job, lose their gaming club, the FLGS closes, or there's simply hobby fatigue in which a gamer wants to try something new.

Conversely, there are people that are going to collect GW product no matter what they do.

So, the actual veteran market GW needs to try to woo is the intersection of "those that aren't burnt out externally" and "those that aren't on board already anyway."

So, I agree with Mystery to the extent that I think GW thinks that particular demo isn't worth catering to. I disagree in that I think that a substantial part of the problem with that demo is the way they relate. Releasing low investment product (rules, non-plastic kits, expansions), updating rules, etc, are all relatively cheap ways GW could help keep even the disparate interests of veterans satisfied. Couple that with better PR, and I think you'd see less backlash.

Well, yes. It's not all about price! GW has shown no loyalty to the vets. A common complaint. But to me they are just plain insulting and they make no attempt at hiding it. I mean look at all the GW rebranded items. It's insulting to see them charge $5 for elmers glue. That's just one example, but there are many of them. Forgeworld to me is just a way for GW to see how far they can push their pricing. I loved GW when they first started, but for the last 10 years or so all I've seen is a set of hands grabbing for my wallet.

Mr Mystery wrote:
a total gaming whore

A whore would have less restrictive and exclusive tastes (ie not just choose one not-so-particular endeavour).

Using your metaphor, you are a more-or-less chained-to-the-bed personal toy. To be used and abused at your master's pleasure.


I flit from game system to system, company to company, never staying with just one for more than is necessary. I exhibit no 'allegiance' to one company, using and discarding from many.
Yet even then, there are some that I will not sully myself with (Wotc). A gamer's gotta have standards, even if they are low.

Andrew1975 wrote:But to me they are just plain insulting and they make no attempt at hiding it. I mean look at all the GW rebranded items. It's insulting to see them charge $5 for elmers glue. That's just one example, but there are many of them.

Agree with the above:

The guys at the FLGS had a good laugh about 2nd Edition like the Eldar Avatar and Commander Dante (and upcoming Warp Spiders) that are being flogged as NEW and IMPROVED now that they've transitioned to FINECAST. No doubt that they're great sculpts, but hardly new, as some of those sculpts are older than their target market.

yeah,

Da Boss wrote:He only beats me because he LOVES me!

LunaHound wrote:But the problem is, the vets are not saying they dont want to purchase GW stuff.

Agree, I'm a Vet, I want stuff!

LunaHound wrote:They are saying they dont want to purchase the stuff that are made to cater to the newbie starters.

Disagree. I want the next shiney new thing as much a a noob... maybe even more!

H.B.M.C. wrote:You make it sound like "getting new customers" and "keeping existing customers" are mutually exclusive. That's horse-gak. Even Grotsnik knows that.

that's what I think too.

H.B.M.C. wrote:GW are all about short-term cash grabs with no grasp of long-term business growth. And if what they were doing was working they wouldn't see year-on-year falls in sales, would they?

Wrong surely re-introducing/re-invigourationg a range like DarkEldar is a long term investment, but possibly one they should have done earlier.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I've been posting on the Internet for a long time, but this is perhaps the first time I've seen the "You're not a real person, therefore your opinion is invalid" argument.
Nice to know that I can be so easily and casually dismissed...

giggle!

Polonius wrote:
Most good also require replacement. As you pointed out, once bought, a GW army requires a new BGB every 4-5 years, a new codex every 4-10 years, and a few new units every couple of years.

Assuming a $50 book every 4 years, a new $30 codex every 5 years, and a new battleforce every single year, GW is bringing in 12.50 + 6 + 90 = $108 a year. A single newbie building an army from scratch is worth roughly three veterans.

Except those three vets, will also buy the new units that appear in the new codex and other cool stuff.

alphaomega wrote:In 11 years I have spent a lot of my own income with GW. Just looking at my Space Marines army that was largely purchased over 3 months I spent close to £300.

The customers who have the funds to make large purchases are not the ones they are pulling into the hobby. They are the ones they are driving away.

I don't under stand where this idea of pushing away comes from... I think the point GW naysayers are some how convinced on the notion that since vets are already addicted to the hobby GW won't waste resources on retention.

oh and my favourite little bit of nothing...

JOHIRA wrote:... Where's the game for people who like model ships? Discontinued. Where's the game for people who like giant sprawling battlefields where the infantry are no bigger than a piece of corn? Discontinued. Where's the skirmish game? Discontinued. Where's the 54mm roleplaying game? Discontinued. Where's the racing game? Never existed! Where's the aircraft game? Discontinued. Where's the game where you spend several hundred dollars to make an army of 32mm identical space marines? Ooh, they've got that. Which color of space marine do you like? Do you want the angry space marines, or the evil angry space marines? .

Panic...

Panic wrote:

Polonius wrote:
Most good also require replacement. As you pointed out, once bought, a GW army requires a new BGB every 4-5 years, a new codex every 4-10 years, and a few new units every couple of years.

Assuming a $50 book every 4 years, a new $30 codex every 5 years, and a new battleforce every single year, GW is bringing in 12.50 + 6 + 90 = $108 a year. A single newbie building an army from scratch is worth roughly three veterans.

Except those three vets, will also buy the new units that appear in the new codex and other cool stuff.

Panic...

The amount that vets spend is obviously pretty scattered. But A new player buys paints, rulebook, codex, transport, and an army. It take a pretty commited vet, or a fairly long amount of time, to recreate that impact.

The internet likes to backseat manage GW, and frankly does a terrible job of it. I've read threads predicting the collapse of GW due to price increases/competition/poor rules/etc for pretty much the entire decade I've been in the hobby. You can make a case that the hobby is actually stronger now than it was then.

This leads me to conclude that while GW is far from perfect, they actually seem to know what they're doing. At least to a great extent than stated online.

Polonius wrote:

Panic wrote:

Polonius wrote:
Most good also require replacement. As you pointed out, once bought, a GW army requires a new BGB every 4-5 years, a new codex every 4-10 years, and a few new units every couple of years.

Assuming a $50 book every 4 years, a new $30 codex every 5 years, and a new battleforce every single year, GW is bringing in 12.50 + 6 + 90 = $108 a year. A single newbie building an army from scratch is worth roughly three veterans.

Except those three vets, will also buy the new units that appear in the new codex and other cool stuff.

Panic...

The amount that vets spend is obviously pretty scattered. But A new player buys paints, rulebook, codex, transport, and an army. It take a pretty commited vet, or a fairly long amount of time, to recreate that impact.

The internet likes to backseat manage GW, and frankly does a terrible job of it. I've read threads predicting the collapse of GW due to price increases/competition/poor rules/etc for pretty much the entire decade I've been in the hobby. You can make a case that the hobby is actually stronger now than it was then.

This leads me to conclude that while GW is far from perfect, they actually seem to know what they're doing. At least to a great extent than stated online.

Yeah, but you are not factoring in the cost of new Gamers. When you look at how much is costs to run the GW stores, the same stores that most any vet will never step foot in. A vet does not really require GW to spend anymore money as long as they are kept happy. Retention and a reaccuring income streams are the established norm of most any business. You will of course always need new customers, but retaining your old ones is just as important.

Andrew1975 wrote:
Yeah, but you are not factoring in the cost of new Gamers. When you look at how much is costs to run the GW stores, the same stores that most any vet will never step foot in. A vet does not really require GW to spend anymore money as long as they are kept happy. Retention and a reaccuring income streams are the established norm of most any business. You will of course always need new customers, but retaining your old ones is just as important.

I understand that, and I've pointed out ways that GW could improve that for relatively low cost.

What we don't know is how much retention would occur if GW acts as they do now, compared to them trying harder to retain vets.

I think it's possible that enough people are retained that trying harder to get people to buy "one more army" doesn't pay off. It's part of my larger theory that people generally don't leave GW because of GW, but because there are external factors that make staying the hobby less appealing.

lukewild1982 wrote:Someone said earlier this was going to end badly, I feel they were right.

MagickalMemories wrote:Eric
(Does not see this thread ending well)

I'm shocked we've made it to page 3. I think we'll see a lock before 6.

Eric

Andrew 1975 Out of curiousity. Do you own or did own a business or worked in a position that has high amount of authority involved in day to day manners?

Sir you have been stating what many of us who owned companies or worked in marketing/held a position of authority have been commenting over the years.

Your comments are well thought out and logical in its conclusion.

Adam LongWalker wrote:Andrew 1975 Out of curiousity. Do you own or did own a business or worked in a position that has high amount of authority involved in day to day manners?

Sir you have been stating what many of us who owned companies or worked in marketing/held a position of authority have been commenting over the years.

Your comments are well thought out and logical in its conclusion.

I own a Bar and a Web design company. If I treated my customers, or ran my business like GW, well I wouldn't have either anymore.

I understand that, and I've pointed out ways that GW could improve that for relatively low cost.

What we don't know is how much retention would occur if GW acts as they do now, compared to them trying harder to retain vets.

I think it's possible that enough people are retained that trying harder to get people to buy "one more army" doesn't pay off. It's part of my larger theory that people generally don't leave GW because of GW, but because there are external factors that make staying the hobby less appealing.

Yeah, I hear you and there are a few things.

1 you are right, it would not take much for GW to implement something but they never have in the past. Get more active on the internet, get rid of WD and put all that content on the website to drive sales on said website. Same with army and rule books. Paper media is dead, it is far cheaper to do web content. It could be subscription based, but also free, the traffic and direct linkage with purchasing would make it worth it to GW. Look at BOW, if GW did a site like that, people would come to check the news and purchase. As it is now I have to go to 4-5 different sites for GW news if I want it. It would be worth it just for the marketing insight and consumer data collection.

2 GW really only has 2 games now. These games were part of a GW rotation, so that once you got tired of one you moved onto the other, plus there were different styles of games, lets face it they have fantasy and fantasy in space now, they really are not that different. But who can afford to play 4-5 different GW games now?

3. I don't think I agree with your theory. I know quite a few gaming groups of older men, that were happy to play GW when it was affordable and stocked a lot of product, but now they just switched to other cheaper games. These are lawyers, policemen, married, single. I've found that gamers are gamers, they will find something to play. They tend to be more into the social aspect so videogames don't do it, and while they will enjoy playing poker with others, they find no substitute for being a field general like a good war game.

If anything the costs of GW makes people choose between other factors and GW. I knew guys that had GW and kids, they didn't have to choose, but now you are almost forced to. 40K or gas for my car, hmmmmm. GW or clothes for my kids hmmmmmm. That wasn't a choice before.

they actually seem to know what they're doing.

You lost me there Polonius.

I doubt very much that GW will go bust anytime soon, but the line that we are constantly fed about how grand the business plans are do not look so true to me either.
The peculiar masochistic tendencies of older players who beg for more pain, and the unassuming niavety of young blood provide keep things ticking over.

So yes Mr M is correct in that sense maybe, that the problem is the customer. Not enough are willing to tell them to stop piddling around.
Everything is not fine at Willow Lane imho

Polonius wrote:
While I completely agree with the bolded text, I have to argue, again, that while it's cheaper to keep a vet than recruit a newb, the return on investment might be higher for the newb.

But each vet of one army can become a newb of another.

At a local shop, their best times of revenue with GW was when there was a well established gaming community and when someone finished an army up to a certain point, they'd get lulled in by a new release and do the whole newb level investment over again.

Case in point, I have bought; Protectorate of Menoth, Trollbloods, Mercenaries, Legion of Everblight, Khador, Cygnar, Cryx. Back when I played GW games I had: Space Marines, Orks, Tyranids, Dark Eldar, Imperial Guard, Lost & the Damned, Alpha Legion, Blood Angels. Oh, and Vampire Counts, Warriors of Chaos, Wood Elves.

If you can do things that keep those people around at relatively low cost, then they can be a constant source of revenue and a captive audience for the newb marketting techniques to get them into a new army.

I'd wager that GW figures that external factors are more important to staying in the hobby than anything they do themselves. Meaning, people get married, move, get a new job, lose their gaming club, the FLGS closes, or there's simply hobby fatigue in which a gamer wants to try something new.

I'd also suggest that their demo sales process is good enough that it sells the product to people who would normally not be inclined to being a miniature gamer. And thus when the original sales effect wears off, they go back to not being involved in the hobby.

If I thought the majority of my customers were people like that, I wouldn't spend a second on retaining them.

Could be that there's just not enough of the die hards in the population to sustain GW at it's current size.

Releasing low investment product (rules, non-plastic kits, expansions), updating rules, etc, are all relatively cheap ways GW could help keep even the disparate interests of veterans satisfied. Couple that with better PR, and I think you'd see less backlash.

You nailed it.

If GW wants to be a growth story again, they should look at the product that gave them their greatest year over year growth. The first is 40k 2nd edition. The second was Lord of the Rings. Both are lower model count compared to current 40k and WFB games. Coincidentally, Privateer is utterly swamped with new customers from their crazy growth rate and their flagship product contains about the same model count and ease of entry as GW's did when GW was growing at the highest rate it ever did-- transitioning from a company operating in one country to a truly international concern.

One huge fault to everyone who is defending GW is why can't they not do both? Appeal to the new customer as well as please the veteran.

Name some of the biggest companies in your country to date. Do they only take a focus on a single demographic and push that demographic until they have been bled dry?

No.....GW needs to wake up and realize what they are doing. Stop making excuses for them and then try to rationalize it because "it is good economic sense" why they are driving a product into the ground.

@Pael: The first step of correcting yourself is admitting that you made a mistake. GW will never correct itself because they are of the mind that they don't make mistakes. If anything, MrMystery exemplifies this attitude. The internet is just a panel of whiny nerds who don't "understand the business" like they do - if they did, they'd understand that GW is already doing everything right - as such, the fanbase's complaints are totally unreasonable, and considered null and void. Any setbacks and failures are all caused by uncontrollable external forces. S'ok though. They can always raise prices and cut fat to compensate.

-edit2- crap. Ninja'd

@keezus Exactly I fell like GW is hiding behind the recession as the reason thier sales are dropping. Yet how many new games have been released DURING the recession and are doing very well?

Mr Mystery wrote:

Take me, former employee (no less than three stints) loyal to the product, a total gaming whore, but most interested in friendly, narrative gaming...

If you like, we're the spoiled brats to GW's parents. They physically cannot please every single player. That they manage to keep their core gamers happy is a small miracle.

So face up to it. GW do really rather well, all things considered.

So, your a totally loyal whore. At least real whores get paid...

And we, regular consumers of product, are supposed to give any credence to what you've just said why now?


You, totally loyal whore, are telling me that GW do rather well? What is a 'core gamer' anyway? Is it more 'totally loyal to the product gaming whores'? Should the rest of us be more like you then Mr Mystery? Your telling us we've 'never had it so good'...

You've just destroyed your own argument and point of stance in your opening statements.

Come dakkanauts and witness the horror of the GW Apolo-masochist, see him dance on hot coals for the whimsical pleasures of Tom 'Thulsa Doom' Kirby.

GW Marketing Thought for the day:
Blessed is the mind too small for doubt, or educated buying...

GW can benefit somewhat from its sheer size: inertia alone means that it will continue to have a strong presence in miniatures wargaming for years to come.

However.

If you believe that GW has been in a market share battle that's done anything but steadily grind lower as previously insignificant companies continue to grow and thrive, especially given the various financial and anecdotal evidence that's come to light over the past few months, then your head is firmly under a rock.

Andrew1975 wrote:
1 you are right, it would not take much for GW to implement something but they never have in the past. Get more active on the internet, get rid of WD and put all that content on the website to drive sales on said website. Same with army and rule books. Paper media is dead, it is far cheaper to do web content. It could be subscription based, but also free, the traffic and direct linkage with purchasing would make it worth it to GW. Look at BOW, if GW did a site like that, people would come to check the news and purchase. As it is now I have to go to 4-5 different sites for GW news if I want it. It would be worth it just for the marketing insight and consumer data collection.

If anything the costs of GW makes people choose between other factors and GW. I knew guys that had GW and kids, they didn't have to choose, but now you are almost forced to. 40K or gas for my car, hmmmmm. GW or clothes for my kids hmmmmmm. That wasn't a choice before.

Replying to these two points:
1) Over and over I see people that work on web design tell me 'print is dead'. I think this is a case of everything looking like a nail when all you have is a hammer. Yes, GW could do more with their website. Everyone could. But it doesn't mean they need to get rid of White Dwarf. Taking the magazine off racks will lose some exposure. Driving all your attention to your website will also lose some stores that sell your product. Less exposure will hurt in the long term.

5) People will always choose between GW and Kids. Kids are expensive as hell, both in money and time. Gas prices going up aren't something GW controls.) People are always going to have to make a choice betwen life and hobbies. It's not even a contest when you get married and have kids. Those are huge sweeping changes in your life. GW could be free and people would have to drop the hobby.

Using your metaphor, you are a more-or-less chained-to-the-bed personal toy. To be used and abused at your master's pleasure.

Where do I sign up?

But seriously on the vet vs newbie thing and potential worth, would it not be fair to say that the vets simply have more disposable income?
I accept another example given that one may start to have a family, have to buy a house, relocate etc but in general I'd be fairly certain that more 25+s have more money to spend and do spend on GW in a year then a 14 or 15 year old.
I'd wager that after this summers hoo ha has calmed down most of the vets on here who railed against the price rises will be back spending their disposable income on new units/armies etc. Especially if Crons/Eldar/DAs get a revamp. And most definetly if 6th ed comes around early next year.

Dont get me wrong Im as pissed as anyone with the constant rises and overhyped finecast but I'll still buy those Crons should they get redone (redone well I might add).

A Moderator wrote:Guys, especially people who disagree with the original point, let's remember the core Dakka rule -- attack the argument NOT the user.

Mr. Mystery should not be personally attacked just because you disagree with his opinion.

Thank you.

Ratius wrote:

Using your metaphor, you are a more-or-less chained-to-the-bed personal toy. To be used and abused at your master's pleasure.

Where do I sign up?

But seriously on the vet vs newbie thing and potential worth, would it not be fair to say that the vets simply have more disposable income?
I accept another example given that one may start to have a family, have to buy a house, relocate etc but in general I'd be fairly certain that more 25+s have more money to spend and do spend on GW in a year then a 14 or 15 year old.
I'd wager that after this summers hoo ha has calmed down most of the vets on here who railed against the price rises will be back spending their disposable income on new units/armies etc. Especially if Crons/Eldar/DAs get a revamp. And most definetly if 6th ed comes around early next year.

Dont get me wrong Im as pissed as anyone with the constant rises and overhyped finecast but I'll still buy those Crons should they get redone (redone well I might add).

The biggest problem is that not every "vet" is an adult and not every "newbie" is a kid.

It's a flawed metaphor from the get-go. Adults can be newbies, and kids can be vets.

This has been an...interesting thread...and at times have said correct things on both sides. Yes, GW does need the noobs because when they buy, they usually buy in largish lump sums, yes, veterans tend to buy a squad here or there, but continue to do so. Both are important, and both are needed to be successful. I started a new necron army a month ago, and am eagerly awaiting a codex, i know that I am going to easily drop 400+ dollars when it comes out on it. I am pretty sure that most necron players will do somewhat similiar purchasing and then there are the people who just start up that new army. One thing i dont enjoy is getting getting butt pwned by GW, $14 per immortal, in a squad that could very easily be made in plastic...also GW needs the vets, when I walked into a GW for the first time, I saw some dudes playing what looked to be a sweet game with some sweet models and they were chatting with the staff and having a great time. Not being a model person prior to that, those vets were a MAJOR reason why I got involved. Posters and covers arent the only advertising in the wargame industry, Veterans who play the game in FLGS's were a huge reason i got into the game, at least for me. In my opinion, GW not only needs the vets for their consistent purchases, but also their free advertising, i dont see them doing commercials on TV!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
but you are correct, i am just an internet user name, there is no person behind this account that buys things

and kids can be vets.

Call me old faishoned but would be really nervous about letting a 12 year old near my cat with a scalpel.

Kilkrazy wrote:

A Moderator wrote:Guys, especially people who disagree with the original point, let's remember the core Dakka rule -- attack the argument NOT the user.

Mr. Mystery should not be personally attacked just because you disagree with his opinion.

Thank you.

Quite so and my post reads like a personal attack (it isn't, I'm just using flavourful and humorous text to illustrate what you spelt out in your opening post, Mr Mystery). I'm saying he's opened this thread with a massive disclaimer that states 'I am incredibly partisan and stand in a very polarised faction on the spectrum' yet then wants to present a point as 'measured' and central and suitable for rational discussion. It just reads as laughable to state 'I am a committed vegan and ecowarrior totally convinced, before any debate starts, that all meat is murder and will not listen to any other arguments but ignoring all that for a minute, isn't it obvious that humanity should give up eating meat as it's a bit cruel?' obvious flaw in discussion is obvious. Would a self confessed gaming whore, 3 time employee and product loyalist be a suited person to say to the rest of the world 'you should all be thankful GW is doing such a great job'... Likely? Yes. Suitable? Not really.

Mr MDG and I agree on a good many things in the OT, but on GW and it's practices, nope, not an inch. I'd love to get some business analysts like JPMorgan to take a look over the company and produce a report on it's customer relations. A neutral firm with a professional and honest analysis.

Fullheadofhair is, by his account (and reading his analyses I'm willing to believe him) a professional equity analyst.

The Cliff's notes:

GW revenue is up due to aggressive cost cutting (ex: 1 person stores) and increased prices.

Sales volumes are actually down, and at a larger %than prices are up, indicating that demand for GW product is elastic.

As an economist, I can tell you that the slope of demand curves becomes increasingly steep as you continue to raise prices, such that at infinitely high prices, you move insignificant volumes. This suggests that GW will reach a point where their price increases actually result in revenue loss due to the decline in sales volume.

Black Library and their video game licenses, however, are pretty valuable. Black Library especially is enjoying big volume increases. This makes GW overall look a little better, even as the model/sales segment continues to stagger.

Customer is always right, and when a large percentage of the customers are ticked off...then the company needs to make a change, and the result over the last few years of this lack of flexibility has been the rise of games such as Hordes or Warmachine, i dont want GW to die, i really want it to win out and rebound to the complete monopoly and wargaming giant it once was

sourclams wrote:Fullheadofhair is, by his account (and reading his analyses I'm willing to believe him) a professional equity analyst.

The Cliff's notes:

GW revenue is up due to aggressive cost cutting (ex: 1 person stores) and increased prices.

Sales volumes are actually down, and at a larger %than prices are up, indicating that demand for GW product is elastic.

As an economist, I can tell you that the slope of demand curves becomes increasingly steep as you continue to raise prices, such that at infinitely high prices, you move insignificant volumes. This suggests that GW will reach a point where their price increases actually result in revenue loss due to the decline in sales volume.

Black Library and their video game licenses, however, are pretty valuable. Black Library especially is enjoying big volume increases. This makes GW overall look a little better, even as the model/sales segment continues to stagger.

Do we know how valuable the BL and game licences are, really?

From what I recall of the recent financial statement, licencing activity accounted for under £5 million of revenue, which is under 4% of total revenue. Whilst a welcome contribution, it won't save the company.

We don't know the degree to which the BL books and video games are "complementary" products to the core rules and models. I mean complementary in the economic sense of bacon and eggs.