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.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/stockrank-movers-games-workshop-wields-123411209.html

What are your thoughts?

LOL

‘slightly odd customers that these shops attract are probably very loyal, as they are locked into that nerdy lifestyle, and probably won't be getting married anytime soon.’

This is also funny:

Most figurines need to be glued together and painted with paintsets that can cost as much as £99. The diehard Warhammer fan will allegedly buy an entire set of new figures if they make just one mistake on one figurine.

Stock investors see this as 'their customers must be rich suckers!'

‘slightly odd customers that these shops attract are probably very loyal, as they are locked into that nerdy lifestyle, and probably won't be getting married anytime soon.’

Sheeeesh, way to drag a Brother down

nkelsch wrote:
LOL

‘slightly odd customers that these shops attract are probably very loyal, as they are locked into that nerdy lifestyle, and probably won't be getting married anytime soon.’

This is also funny:

Most figurines need to be glued together and painted with paintsets that can cost as much as £99. The diehard Warhammer fan will allegedly buy an entire set of new figures if they make just one mistake on one figurine.

Stock investors see this as 'their customers must be rich suckers!'

Getting married this December and I have vast amounts of Dettol to correct my many painting mistakes - your move Yahoo!

That lost credibility when it used a unrealistic and prejudiced view of the customer base to describe them, as lonely, rich, obsessed nerds. Where does this come from, the author clearly knows nothing, so was it imparted by GW itself? Is that the perception they relate to their investors? Where did this bizarre claim that people will throw out a heap of figures and buy new ones if they make a mistake? No one does that and you'd be a mug buying stock in a company that survives on the basis their customers are that blindly loyal.

If this somehow reflects GW view of the customers thats the final nail for me.

 Reality-Torrent wrote:
If this somehow reflects GW view of the customers thats the final nail for me.

Certain things have been reported in the past as words to that effect about their customers being said in manager's meetings.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Reality-Torrent wrote:
If this somehow reflects GW view of the customers thats the final nail for me.

Certain things have been reported in the past as words to that effect about their customers being said in manager's meetings.

Well now we don't know that for certain.

Only that they believe our favourite part of The Hobby is buying GW products...

Now you see why I used the qualifier of "reported"

Rumour has it, this is pretty much what is said, but save for bugging the next meeting or being a fly on the wall we'll never know for certain.

nkelsch wrote:
LOL

‘slightly odd customers that these shops attract are probably very loyal, as they are locked into that nerdy lifestyle, and probably won't be getting married anytime soon.’

This is also funny:

Most figurines need to be glued together and painted with paintsets that can cost as much as £99. The diehard Warhammer fan will allegedly buy an entire set of new figures if they make just one mistake on one figurine.

Stock investors see this as 'their customers must be rich suckers!'

Paul Scott can get bent

Edited by RiTides - Rule #1 on Dakka is Be Polite

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Reality-Torrent wrote:
If this somehow reflects GW view of the customers thats the final nail for me.

Certain things have been reported in the past as words to that effect about their customers being said in manager's meetings.

Or, it could just be Yahoo's notoriously bad and clueless reporting. Some of their in-house writers are just terrible, and its not like table top gamers don't already have a reputation of being a rather picky and peculiar lot.

nkelsch wrote:
LOL

‘slightly odd customers that these shops attract are probably very loyal, as they are locked into that nerdy lifestyle, and probably won't be getting married anytime soon.’

Yeah, I shared that with my wife. ROFLMAO.

nkelsch wrote:
This is also funny:

Most figurines need to be glued together and painted with paintsets that can cost as much as £99. The diehard Warhammer fan will allegedly buy an entire set of new figures if they make just one mistake on one figurine.

Stock investors see this as 'their customers must be rich suckers!'

No wonder GW makes so much money. One errant paintstroke, 200 new miniatures. Lord, the way he put it sounds slowed. But to be fair, what he probably meant to say was, "...buy an entire box of figures if they irrevocably ruin one of the figures out of the box".

On the other hand, I so much wish my paintset cost £99. My last airbrush cost twice that :X

The crazy thing is he seems to know nothing about GW's business, or even why they don't have the expenses they did last year (which I think were due to a massively overcosted website overhaul and the Chapterhouse case, although perhaps one of those was captured on the prior year's report). Does he really think they are going to grow their business? Maybe if the wargaming industry grows, but they're certainly not increasing their market share - they're losing it in droves.

This is why I think GW is mostly a sham. I wouldn't be surprised if they were embezzling from that big cash reserve they always tout as having.

They pull these business moves that only look good to braindead stock/business analysts, when in reality it only serves to hide the underlying problems.

nkelsch wrote:
LOL

‘slightly odd customers that these shops attract are probably very loyal, as they are locked into that nerdy lifestyle, and probably won't be getting married anytime soon.’

This is also funny:

Most figurines need to be glued together and painted with paintsets that can cost as much as £99. The diehard Warhammer fan will allegedly buy an entire set of new figures if they make just one mistake on one figurine.

Stock investors see this as 'their customers must be rich suckers!'

Well, it's ironic in that the financial website is also pointing out we value quality above price... cause they're not writing for people more interested in financial dealings, or in other words, money.

Maybe that's our problem, we don't emphasize the value of money in and of itself, and instead value the product more. Maybe we should spend less time playing games and more time buying stocks. Cause playing with money is an even more fun game.

And money is what makes minis happen, not the collective interest of a group of people leveraging services with a simple social tool such as currency... wait.....

Especially when the service your provide is broadly insulting a large group of people on the internet. People do that for free every day, the most intelligent of us learn to charge others for it.

 Vertrucio wrote:
This is why I think GW is mostly a sham. I wouldn't be surprised if they were embezzling from that big cash reserve they always tout as having.

Why would they do that? They just (legally) pay out dividends Nearly 7% goes to the chairman anyhow, LOL.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

Or, it could just be Yahoo's notoriously bad and clueless reporting. Some of their in-house writers are just terrible, and its not like table top gamers don't already have a reputation of being a rather picky and peculiar lot.

Hold the phone, Yahoo has people employed under the job description of 'writer'?

Has anyone told their 'writers' that?

They seem to be missing the point where the company has been shedding revenue (having nearly 50% higher revenues, adjusted for inflation, 11 years ago) and with far more competition than they've had since the early 90's before they became the company they are now, not to mention a much reduced line of products. This is a company that has borrowed money to pay dividends, taking it from the black to the red. I mean...really.

This really feels like a writeup written by someone looking purely at an outside analyst's (poorly researched) brief writeup and GW's own description of its issues and not much deeper.

Not saying GW is going to go bankrupt tomorrow, but I would not be rushing out to invest money in them either.

@Vaktathi - this is a very common problem of analysts. They rarely know very much about any company they analyze. They're analyzing mostly financials, published articles in recognized press, and a company's own press kit (which of course, is positive, right?). For small cap companies that aren't in the news much, they miss a lot of details like that.

All this being said, a company making a lot less money today than 11 years ago, or a company that has a poor showing in recent revenues is actually not a good reason to sell (or buy) a stock.

The only way to make money on the stock market is: (a) be right and (b) be different.

The price on the market is already adjusted for all the obvious stuff (like, everything you or I, or even a professional analyst could read out of financial reports), and revenue predictions based on all the easy stuff is already out there. So you only make money if you pick a stock that moves in the opposite direction as what everyone else thinks is going to happen.

It doesn't even matter which way the stock moves, as long as you're predicting the opposite of what the market thinks, and you act on it (for instance, shorting the stock, when everyone thinks its going to go up, or buying it when people think it's on a spiral into oblivion). Or, a safer bet, you think it will go up a LOT when others think it will go up a little.

 Talys wrote:
@Vaktathi - this is a very common problem of analysts. They rarely know very much about any company they analyze. They're analyzing mostly financials, published articles in recognized press, and a company's own press kit (which of course, is positive, right?). For small cap companies that aren't in the news much, they miss a lot of details like that.

All this being said, a company making a lot less money today than 11 years ago, or a company that has a poor showing in recent revenues is actually not a good reason to sell (or buy) a stock.

Singularly amongst itself, no, you are correct, it's one factor amongst many (such as increased competition, etc), but the steady and continuing nature of that decline is what should be concerning.

This guy wrote some funny gak man. Thanks sending that link, read that at lunch and laughed so hard people at work thought I was crazy.

@Vaktathi - I agree Even increased competition is a definite concern. I mean, more competition is a reason for declining revenue -- but at the end of the day, a good excuse is still an excuse. An investor just wants results!

And don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that GAW.L is a buy (or a sell)! I'm not sure if the market's pricing is too high, too low, or just right. I'm just pointing out that the best way to score a win (money in YOUR pocket) is to trade GAW.L when it's mispriced, one way or the other.

@Marlov - yeah, it was pretty funny. My wife just loved the part about the nerds not getting married or whatever. She gets to hold that over me now for God knows how long

yahoo is the new National ENQUIRER of which i quit reading their crap a long time ago especially when a lot of it is wrong, misleading, etc. I only go there every once in a while to check my email that i wish i did not have with them anymore.

 Spacewolfoddballz wrote:
yahoo is the new National ENQUIRER of which i quit reading their crap a long time ago especially when a lot of it is wrong, misleading, etc. I only go there every once in a while to check my email that i wish i did not have with them anymore.

There is no kind way of saying this man. Yahoo mail sucks. Even Yahoo employees thought so -- they had to be beaten over the head to stop using were using Outlook.

Incidentally, as silly as this article is, it isn't even that egregious, in relative terms. If you read tech analysts' articles (and are in the IT loop) some of them are *outrageous*, which is partly why the price of some stocks go all nuts and then come crashing down

I only have yahoo mail because I needed an account to make my Yahoo Fantasy Baseball/Football Leagues back in the day.