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.

NAVARRO wrote:They all were outside playing paintball spacemarinez!

sourclams wrote:Maybe he and Assistant #1 left to whittle new Tau models out of blocks of wood, JUST FOR THE INDY RETAILERS.

Both of these are less silly than just not doing it altogether

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:
Can anyone point out what specific actions were a result of this "shoddiness"? IT problems happen. Windows ME crashed when it was being premiered to journalists for instance, and they're the biggest software company in the world.

You can excuse anything, so how about this. What excuses GW from participating in the demo/discussion after the presentation? What excuses the empty table?

Maybe after their poor presentation, they were afraid that all the gathered retailers would be really mean to them ( ), so they took their ball and went home, just like with their Facebook page.

That would be a pretty poor showing from a major corporation to just walk out after being hammered by dealers' questions. I am rather disappointed in GW's recent handling of pressure situations.

 oni wrote:
I think some might be jumping to conclusions here. This show is an isolated incident.

Not really. Talk to some of your local FLGS owners - I have talked to the ones near me, and this type of showing with the evading of questions is basically all that GW has done at any of the trade shows recently (by recently, I am talking within the last year or so).

 BryllCream wrote:
Can anyone point out what specific actions were a result of this "shoddiness"? IT problems happen. Windows ME crashed when it was being premiered to journalists for instance, and they're the biggest software company in the world.

Have you read the OP's introductory post?

Thats not a mistake. Thats someone just trying to wing it through a presentation without proper practice, and ducking out at a opportune time. Then to leave a blank table? At a sales meeting?

It went beyond technical difficulties when it went "we can't tell you anything...." then the empty showing.

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Some back story of the fall of TSR posted by a "guest" over at the simplygaming forums.

With Wizards of the Coast growing at an explosive rate and beginning to nip at its heels, Williams and TSR began to squeeze the life out of the very market that had supported it. Rather than attempt to grow the marketplace and win in competition, Williams instead tried to banish everybody else from what she apparently viewed as her private domain. Under her management the company began to ruthlessly enforce its own copyrights along with a few it didn't even have (such as a claim that nobody else could use the word "dragon").

It also became incredibly hostile to everyone, especially its fans. As the Internet exploded onto the public consciousness in the early- to mid-90's, Dungeons & Dragons players naturally brought their chosen hobby online. TSR followed them, issuing dozens of cease and desist orders that shut down fan sites. The company even tried to prevent D&D fans from discussing the game in chat rooms and on message boards, earning the derisive nickname: "They Sue Regularly."

The company was hostile to its fans, business partners, and even former associates that didn't have much clout with the company. TSR became infamous for micromanaging its licensing partners, with draconian licensing managers that dictated everything that a licensor could do, from the color of a box to exactly which piece of licensed D&D artwork the licensee would be forced to use. Even Gary Gygax himself wasn't immune. When Gygax created a new RPG system with Game Designer's Workshop called Dangerous Journeys, TSR sued him for copyright infringement. The case was eventually settled when TSR agreed to purchase all rights to the game for a considerable sum of money -- a pyrrhic victory for TSR, as the case cost the company far more than it could afford.

The parallels are really eye opening.

Here's a link to the full story: Link

That's just eerie. It's almost like both companies, on finding they were no longer a monopoly, decided if they could crush the industry fast (by hurting independents and driving away fans) they'd kill their competitors and be able to rebuild before taking a big hit...

Let us hope or pray, then, that GW follows TSR's next series of steps: Going bankrupt and being bought by a decent gaming company that wants to grow and even *gasp* IMPROVE a product.

When they said Space marine paintball, I thought it was going to be paintball in space marine armor


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok, lets say, right now GW turtles and someone else buys the license. Before they continue the game, what will happen, will our rulebooks/codexes be rendered invalid until they do something with them?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
When they said Space marine paintball, I thought it was going to be paintball in space marine armor


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok, lets say, right now GW turtles and someone else buys the license. Before they continue the game, what will happen, will our rulebooks/codexes be rendered invalid until they do something with them?

Other than play at GW stores, nothing you do with that codex or rulebook is official. There are no official tournaments, nothing. You will be able to enjoy that rulebook and any rulebook prior as long as it's still readable

In other words, the game will enjoy the same astounding level of support it currently features.

Screw GW, everyone needs to hop off their bandwagon and realize it is a sinking ship. I say let it sink, heck I actively encourage people to help sink it by redirecting all newcomers at my FLGS away from the GW shelf to other game systems. GW has used up all my good will towards them after nearly 15 years of playing their games, I have wiped my hands of them. It is past time they go away or better yet get sold off to a company that gives a crap about the products they release and the customer base that supports them. Times are tough around the world and I refuse to reward a company with the bushiness model espoused by GW. I will dance a jig when I read that they have gone belly up!

That is the most nonsensical vitriol I've read outside of the Off-Topic section in quite awhile.

Well done, sir.

I get a front row seat and eventually room fills. GW's boys start by saying they will be doing a powerpoint presentation, show quick effective ways to teach painting, and a quick game play demo called "space marine paintball". At 8:04 GW NA sales director Brandan Bell, says he will take a few questions while they get computer going.[b]

Alright, I used to work in IT, a power point presentation is not rocket science. Assuming:
A. Your computer works.
B. You have tested your presentation in advance.
C. You have a working overhead projector...

Now assuming these 3 things, you should have been delayed a maximum of 5 minutes... At worst - if it is an automated presentation- you can manually click through the screens. To not have any answers for questions and then to follow it up with absolute incompetence leaves the poor presenter in a bad situation. At worst he should have been able to deflect questions by going through his presentation.

 filbert wrote:
I mean ultimately, it is this rep's job to sell GW to FLGS and the bottom line is he is doing a spectacularly bad job at it. Whether that is down to him or because of corporate failings, is open to interpretation but it is a very pertinent point that there seems to be a certain level of discontent amongst independent retailers and GW for whatever reason are failing to address that.

*nods*

Replace GW with ANYTHING else- a car company, TV company, Computer company....Imagine if Apple showed up to a trade show and had a presenation that bad. Or Sony, or Microsoft.

I highly doubt the detractors in this thread would be so understanding or apologetic. GW's JOB there was to sell itself, and as somene that has had 25 years in retail, that was god awful to read.

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Some back story of the fall of TSR posted by a "guest" over at the simplygaming forums...

The parallels are really eye opening.

Here's a link to the full story: Link

Am I missing something? GW seems to be avoiding nearly all the pitfalls that article describes, and in fact doing the reverse in several cases. The only real parallel seems to be the copyright enforcement.

I'll adding sending C&D's to fansites as "copyright enforcement" to my English-to-Kingsley dictionary then shall I?

 BryllCream wrote:
Can anyone point out what specific actions were a result of this "shoddiness"?

None that you'd acknowledge.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Some back story of the fall of TSR posted by a "guest" over at the simplygaming forums...

The parallels are really eye opening.

Here's a link to the full story: Link

Am I missing something? GW seems to be avoiding nearly all the pitfalls that article describes, and in fact doing the reverse in several cases. The only real parallel seems to be the copyright enforcement.

Being hostile to fans and the internet, not doing market research, not looking at the big picture and changing its strategy, being hostile to business partners, treating the fan base as social inferiors.

Did I miss something?

Also, I panelled for college thesis presentations for advertising majors. If you didn't check if your presentation works beforehand, most likely you will fail unless you can conduct your presentation without the powerpoint. It's a professionalism thing: if you go in front of your client without being prepared, the client will view it as unprofessional. Making your audience wait is entirely unprofessional: time is the most valuable resource of everyone.

 heartserenade wrote:
Did I miss something?

Only that you're talking to the Blue Knight, a man incapable of seeing any flaws in anything GW does.

 Old Man Ultramarine wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Old Man Ultramarine wrote:
Brandan had an assistant and venue worker on the computer. Never got the screen up.

Other 3 threads do not involve my personal observations. Anyone who was there can confirm what happened.

If there was both an assistant and a venue worker trying to get a single computer working then it makes me think that there might have been a technical issue.

Umm, no! They didn't even have the computer plugged in. It's like they walked in room 3 minutes before I did and held on for dear life. Both admitted to not being technically savy.

Please keep in mind that Brendan Bell is the North American director of sales. He was leading the seminar.

Does not compute! Does not compute!

I have always had a hard time trying to think of modelers as lacking technical savvy.

So, we're always bringing topics like this up. It's a comical situation. Know when I realized that GW started not wanting to be involved with their consumer base? When they took down their God Awful forums instead of just making them better (I hated the format).

 Kingsley wrote:

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Some back story of the fall of TSR posted by a "guest" over at the simplygaming forums...

The parallels are really eye opening.

Here's a link to the full story: Link

Am I missing something? GW seems to be avoiding nearly all the pitfalls that article describes, and in fact doing the reverse in several cases. The only real parallel seems to be the copyright enforcement.

Really?

Whether you agree with the assertions other posters are making or not, you really couldn't see any parallels with what GW are accused of doing by those posters and what's written in that article?

In my eyes you've just lost the last shred of credibility you had in this debate.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Ok, lets say, right now GW turtles and someone else buys the license. Before they continue the game, what will happen, will our rulebooks/codexes be rendered invalid until they do something with them?

You will be able to enjoy that rulebook and any rulebook prior as long as it's still readable

Fully demonstrated by the aforementioned TSR situation: there are still people that collect and play 2nd Edition AD&D. Nobody's going to come and take your books away, and if you don't like the direction the After-GW Company takes the game, you could still keep playing 40K 6th (or 5th or 3rd or Rogue Trader) until the end of time, just as people will still be playing AD&D or 3.5 d20 forever. No game based out of books (or even out of non-DRM'd PDFs) will EVER become "unplayable". There's no central server, as with MMO's, that will go down and keep you from being able to log in.

 Kingsley wrote:

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
Some back story of the fall of TSR posted by a "guest" over at the simplygaming forums...

The parallels are really eye opening.

Here's a link to the full story: Link

Am I missing something? GW seems to be avoiding nearly all the pitfalls that article describes, and in fact doing the reverse in several cases. The only real parallel seems to be the copyright enforcement.

Given that the only assets that TSR had in 1995 that were worth anything was its intellectual properties, breaking up the Dungeons & Dragons license was a brilliant, if desperate, move. Now, rather than granting an exclusive license to one company, the company could essentially sell the same license to many different companies. One company could purchase Dark Sun, another could buy Forgotten Realms, and so on.

We have seen, what 9 or 10 licenses issued for what are effectively 2 GW game worlds?

It also became incredibly hostile to everyone, especially its fans. As the Internet exploded onto the public consciousness in the early- to mid-90's, Dungeons & Dragons players naturally brought their chosen hobby online. TSR followed them, issuing dozens of cease and desist orders that shut down fan sites.

Yep - that too.

Rather than attempt to grow the marketplace and win in competition, Williams instead tried to banish everybody else from what she apparently viewed as her private domain.

Shutting down internet retailers from GW's private domain of sales. Attempting to stifle third party bits manufacturers.

That situation couldn't possibly last forever, and it didn't. Serious challengers began to rise, such as West End Games and White Wolf publishing, who were producing fun and successful RPGs that started to bite into the D&D pie.

Substitute WEG and White Wolf with PP and Corvus Belli easily enough...or Wyrd...or any number of other companies who are making inroads on the miniature gaming front.

The rise of video games, particularly popular CRPGs (including the D&D licensed "Gold Box" games), was also siphoning off the core market for D&D.

Swap out CRPGs with RTS and again...same, same.

The biggest threat, though, came from a small, upstart company in Seattle called Wizards of the Coast.

Oh yeah, they are still around and still a threat to anyone who wants to market in geek toys and games - so, consider that to fit as well.

The many settings also contributed to something called "Brand Dilution." The original Dungeons & Dragons brand stood for something. You knew essentially what you were getting when you bought a D&D product. All of these new settings began to play havoc with the rule sets and philosophy of the game. As the settings grew more popular, they began to diverge from one another, advancing along their chosen philosophical paths, essentially becoming their own separate games.

Bit more difficult to see the truth in this one - but most people don't identify with 40K, rather the army they play in 40K (or fantasy for that matter...though it has actually been years since I have met a WFB player - bit like an okapi, I am told they exist...but have no first hand knowledge of them). What that does is it places more emphasis on building a part of the larger brand (Space Marines) over the larger brand itself (Warhammer 40,000). With licensing and what not, these issues of dilution end up being problematic as market research would place the overall brand lower than it might be if the core was emphasized. It still doesn't generally raise the smaller parts to the same level either - so they become less valuable as well.

Years and years of study have gone into this issue - and generally speaking...GW isn't handling it well either.

The company was hostile to its fans, business partners, and even former associates that didn't have much clout with the company. TSR became infamous for micromanaging its licensing partners, with draconian licensing managers that dictated everything that a licensor could do, from the color of a box to exactly which piece of licensed D&D artwork the licensee would be forced to use.

Watch some of the YouTube videos of Alan Merret.

Despite all this, Dungeons & Dragons products continued to sell well, and affection for the game even grew in stature among fans. That was primarily due to the influence of SSI, which had acquired a seven-year license from TSR in 1987, and a host of other hot computer RPGs that "borrowed" elements from D&D.

Swap out SSI for THQ and FFG easily enough.

Nope....nothing the same, nothing at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Magc8Ball wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Ok, lets say, right now GW turtles and someone else buys the license. Before they continue the game, what will happen, will our rulebooks/codexes be rendered invalid until they do something with them?

You will be able to enjoy that rulebook and any rulebook prior as long as it's still readable

Fully demonstrated by the aforementioned TSR situation: there are still people that collect and play 2nd Edition AD&D. Nobody's going to come and take your books away, and if you don't like the direction the After-GW Company takes the game, you could still keep playing 40K 6th (or 5th or 3rd or Rogue Trader) until the end of time, just as people will still be playing AD&D or 3.5 d20 forever. No game based out of books (or even out of non-DRM'd PDFs) will EVER become "unplayable". There's no central server, as with MMO's, that will go down and keep you from being able to log in.

You will have to take my THAC0 from my cold dead hands.

 Kanluwen wrote:
That is the most nonsensical vitriol I've read outside of the Off-Topic section in quite awhile.

Well done, sir.

That's what you call vitriol? What he says about GW is true, and his efforts to help people find better systems and companies should be lauded.

GW is a sinking ship. They saw a 6% growth in profit last year, following a 10+% price hike and the release of a new edition, which emphasized their newest and most disproportionately expensive kits to date, in addition to slashing their expenses across the board. Meanwhile the wargaming industry saw a 20% increase overall. GW is sinking, there can be no question of that. They might not have sunk far, but they're still taking on water with no way to stop it.

Let us all jump ship to the other manufacturers in the industry, the better to insulate the independent retailers against GW's coming collapse.

 azreal13 wrote:
Really?

Whether you agree with the assertions other posters are making or not, you really couldn't see any parallels with what GW are accused of doing by those posters and what's written in that article?

In my eyes you've just lost the last shred of credibility you had in this debate.

In many cases, GW is flat-out doing the reverse of what TSR is described as doing there! The article talks about how TSR created far too many settings and this caused their fanbase to become divided. GW has two settings (three if you count the LotR license), and a lot of people play both, though less so during the current Fantasy slump. It talks about how TSR was extremely strict with licensees-- GW has been expanding its licensing, not tightening it. The similarities between GW and TSR seem surface-level at best, though perhaps there is more going on outside the public eye that might make such a comparison more appropriate?

 Kingsley wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Really?

Whether you agree with the assertions other posters are making or not, you really couldn't see any parallels with what GW are accused of doing by those posters and what's written in that article?

In my eyes you've just lost the last shred of credibility you had in this debate.

In many cases, GW is flat-out doing the reverse of what TSR is described as doing there! The article talks about how TSR created far too many settings and this caused their fanbase to become divided. GW has two settings (three if you count the LotR license), and a lot of people play both, though less so during the current Fantasy slump. It talks about how TSR was extremely strict with licensees-- GW has been expanding its licensing, not tightening it. The similarities between GW and TSR seem surface-level at best, though perhaps there is more going on outside the public eye that might make such a comparison more appropriate?

Wow, talk about seeing what you WANT to see!

Sean O'Brien has already said it better, so I won't tread old ground.

Yeah, aside from the brand dilution part, you could practically just swap out 'TSR' for 'GW' in that article...

The thing that seems to be overlooked a lot is that GW appears to have very conciously chosen as its target a younger age group that they want to churn and burn. The things that they are doing that alienate fans and gamers of the much broader age range that inhabit forums are not things that are going to cause problems with the customers it wants to churn and burn.

There is no reason that they could not target the younger gamers to churn and burn while simultaneously targeting an older group but it appears they have chosen not to do so.

Other than complaints about price and the quality of finecast models, one can find a lot of forum posts of people expressing satisfaction with recent GW releases in both whfb and 40k. GW is certainly not a company that is endearing itself to its fans but I suppose it remains to be seen if they really need to. They are not as good as their supporters claim but neither are they as bad as portrayed by their most ardent detractors.

In almost everyone of these threads one or more people chime in that GW is about to sell the company or the release schedule we see now is a run up to sell the company. Do people not realize that GW is a publicly traded company and thus it is "for sale" every day of the week? Even if major stockholders did not plan on "selling the company" hostile take overs are an everyday occurence in the business world.

I am also amused by the people that are offended by the fact that GW apparently is disinterested in the fans. At least you know where you stand with the company as compared to some company that puts up a facade it gives a damn about anything more than the money it can pry out of your wallet.

Gw did this at a trade show?
fdnlkafsdnjfaenfankfsdbkdfsnbkfds

If you are going to use a "non advertising" advertising strategy then these people at the trade show are your advertising. To put in such a piss poor effort (and here i am mainly thinking about the lack of demo) is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Giving retailers and distributors a release schedule would be a good thing too, how can your retailers advertise if they don't know what's coming?

These types of things coupled with 1 man stores (which were their advertising before staff cutbacks) are only going to make you less visible as a company. I know there is a theory that "if you build it they will come" which clearly doesn't exist outside of bad baseball movies , there is a reason for marketing...it works.

Oh gw. you're like the bully from primary school who doesn't realise that everyone else has caught up to his height/mass and that situatiuon leaves himnot as the bully but as the friendless fat kid

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Given that the only assets that TSR had in 1995 that were worth anything was its intellectual properties, breaking up the Dungeons & Dragons license was a brilliant, if desperate, move. Now, rather than granting an exclusive license to one company, the company could essentially sell the same license to many different companies. One company could purchase Dark Sun, another could buy Forgotten Realms, and so on.

We have seen, what 9 or 10 licenses issued for what are effectively 2 GW game worlds?

The situation with TSR is substantively different from what's going on with GW. Dawn of War 2 and Space Marine are both Warhammer 40,000 games and have the same core universe, thematic elements, and iconography as a base. The situation described in the article involved parceling out different "universes" (like the gothic horror Ravenloft or the desert wasteland Dark Sun) to different companies. The reason this was a bad strategy was twofold:

1. The actual games being made weren't any good. Thus far GW has largely avoided this with its Warhammer 40,000 games.
2. This perpetuated the brand dilution described earlier for TSR, where people were "Ravenloft players" or "Dark Sun players" but not "D&D players" or "TSR players." GW, like it or not, has been very, very successful at creating a lot of "GW players." They are very aware of the risks of diluting their brand or introducing people to other companies, and the term "Games Workshop Hobby" is used for a reason.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
It also became incredibly hostile to everyone, especially its fans. As the Internet exploded onto the public consciousness in the early- to mid-90's, Dungeons & Dragons players naturally brought their chosen hobby online. TSR followed them, issuing dozens of cease and desist orders that shut down fan sites.

This has happened to a limited extent. But there are also fans that GW has worked with, fan sites that GW supports, etc.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Rather than attempt to grow the marketplace and win in competition, Williams instead tried to banish everybody else from what she apparently viewed as her private domain.

Shutting down internet retailers from GW's private domain of sales. Attempting to stifle third party bits manufacturers.

Internet retailers have been restrained in the US since 2001 or 2003 and by all accounts this has increased sales. It isn't a new or desperate policy by any means.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
That situation couldn't possibly last forever, and it didn't. Serious challengers began to rise, such as West End Games and White Wolf publishing, who were producing fun and successful RPGs that started to bite into the D&D pie.

Substitute WEG and White Wolf with PP and Corvus Belli easily enough...or Wyrd...or any number of other companies who are making inroads on the miniature gaming front.

There is no company currently producing a game with Warhammer 40k or Warhammer Fantasy's number of miniatures on the field at once and level of customizability of one's forces, though Dream Forge might be positioned to potentially do so in the future. The fundamental experience of collecting and playing 40k is fairly different from that of most other miniatures games on the market today, unlike the fundamental experience involved with playing D&D versus other roleplaying games.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
The rise of video games, particularly popular CRPGs (including the D&D licensed "Gold Box" games), was also siphoning off the core market for D&D.

Swap out CRPGs with RTS and again...same, same.

RTSes are considered dead in the water as a game genre at present-- there certainly is no "rise of the RTS" going on! Further, turn based strategy games, which are a closer substitute for GW products, are also not being developed particularly strongly-- aside from recent sequels to the XCOM and Civilization series, there has been very little turn-based strategy in the mainstream eye. The current rising star in video games is the MOBA, which is very much not a direct competitor with the tabletop wargaming experience provided by GW and its competitors.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
The biggest threat, though, came from a small, upstart company in Seattle called Wizards of the Coast.

Oh yeah, they are still around and still a threat to anyone who wants to market in geek toys and games - so, consider that to fit as well.

You fundamentally misunderstand the way that Wizards relate to TSR if you think that they relate to GW in the same sense.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
The many settings also contributed to something called "Brand Dilution." The original Dungeons & Dragons brand stood for something. You knew essentially what you were getting when you bought a D&D product. All of these new settings began to play havoc with the rule sets and philosophy of the game. As the settings grew more popular, they began to diverge from one another, advancing along their chosen philosophical paths, essentially becoming their own separate games.

Bit more difficult to see the truth in this one

Because it isn't there.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
but most people don't identify with 40K, rather the army they play in 40K

In my experience this is not remotely the case. I don't consider myself a "Space Marine player" or a "Tau Empire player" or an "Inquisition player," but rather a 40k player. Many people I encounter have multiple armies throughout their time in the hobby and more still have tried many different factions before settling on one.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
What that does is it places more emphasis on building a part of the larger brand (Space Marines) over the larger brand itself (Warhammer 40,000). With licensing and what not, these issues of dilution end up being problematic as market research would place the overall brand lower than it might be if the core was emphasized. It still doesn't generally raise the smaller parts to the same level either - so they become less valuable as well.

It's certainly true that Space Marines are emphasized more than some other elements of the background. But that's because of their iconic status-- to many people, Space Marines are 40k. You attempt to turn a strength into a weakness here.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
The company was hostile to its fans, business partners, and even former associates that didn't have much clout with the company. TSR became infamous for micromanaging its licensing partners, with draconian licensing managers that dictated everything that a licensor could do, from the color of a box to exactly which piece of licensed D&D artwork the licensee would be forced to use.

Watch some of the YouTube videos of Alan Merret.

I looked at the first one I found and saw a video about Space Marine. In it, Alan Merrett talked about GW's close relationship with licensing partners and how they loved what Relic/THQ did with the setting. Not sure what you're on about?

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
Despite all this, Dungeons & Dragons products continued to sell well, and affection for the game even grew in stature among fans. That was primarily due to the influence of SSI, which had acquired a seven-year license from TSR in 1987, and a host of other hot computer RPGs that "borrowed" elements from D&D.

Swap out SSI for THQ and FFG easily enough.

Is FFG about to stop producing 40k products? Does the sale of THQ mean that 40k computer games are dead? Those all seem like very stretch assumptions to me.

By no means should we allow logic to block our arguments.

There is no company currently producing a game with Warhammer 40k or Warhammer Fantasy's number of miniatures on the field at once and level of customizability of one's forces, though Dream Forge might be positioned to potentially do so in the future.

Because wargaming is only limited to customizability of one's forces and the number of miniatures fielded at once.

Yeah, GW has really no competition within the wargaming scene.

RTSes are considered dead in the water as a game genre at present-- there certainly is no "rise of the RTS" going on!

Oh yes, Starcraft 2's Heart of the Swarm isn't such a huge success and the competitive scene for RTS is not really that good even though they give millions of dollars as cash prizes in tournaments and professional teams play them seriously and they have huge fanbases! RTSes are really dead in the water and a money sink!