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.

 Overread wrote:

FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:
Do you think it would be good for the community if the IP went the way of the dodo? I know it is a huge deal, but battletech had its golden days too.

The IP itself could go away and it wouldn't harm the community much. There'd always be someone else to re-invent the idea of bulk hulking men in suits fighting xenos in space.

But GW is more than IP; its a huge company in the miniature wargames market with an influence and marketing and presence that outstrips the others by far. Whilst it might not be the cheapest, its certainly the one most people have heard of, the one most have seen and the one that often gets them in the door. Maybe that means they start with Warhammer or 40K or LotR or they come in and discover miniature wargaming as a whole and branch out into the other games in the genre.

Lose that and I think the whole wargame market would suffer as a whole. The other companies would have to do a LOT more promotional work to generate the uptake of new gamers into the hobby; plus (esp UK side) a lot of work growing more gaming clubs (beyond friend groups and school level playing groups).


Sure if GW and its IP vanished we'd likely see an end to the dozen or so companies that make copy-cat models of the same theme; and we'd probably ride out the initial loss of new recruits for a few years; but that kick would come (in some countries more than others). I'd rather see the market grow, expand, strengthen - and yes with GW focusing on larger scale games that means the market is open field for a lot of smaller companies to get a good foothold on the market - heck that's was PP did with Warmachine. For a long time it was the small scale skirmish game of choice - now they are ramping up toward larger battles and forces; still no the same rank and file as GW, but a similar larger scale setup.

I respectfully have to disagree. History has show, time and time again, that when a big stagnant player collapses the competition always steps in to fill the void and the market rarely suffers. Wang Computer got companies to use word processing mainstream - they died to WordPerfect, Microsoft and Lotus. Kodak was a name once synonymous with photography, now they are not in the business anymore yet more pictures are being taken now than at anytime in history (and worse, they invented the digital camera). Blockbuster were the big boys of video rental, until NetFlix and Amazon readjusted their sails.

Fact is, if GW were to die, the market would be just fine. Wargamers would take up other games and the $200 million that GW does in revenue would split out over the market. I don't think we would have another $200M company, but we would get a bunch of $40M companies filling in the gap as the revenue GW has is divided. Competing companies are all over the world now - PP in North America, Warlord Games and Mantic in Europe, Battlefront in Oceania Region, just to name a few - so the geography is covered. It would be far better in the long run for the market for their to be four or five large companies than the behemoth that is GW today.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

It may be worth noting that none of the companies started by folks that have left GW is being publicly traded - GW stands as a grim example of why going public is a bad idea for game companies.

Being public or private has little to do with how a company is. Just look at Apple under the helm of Steve Jobs or Microsoft under Bill Gates or Oracle under Larry Ellison. They all had or have a passion for the companies they own to be the best at what they do and didn't change this drive whether public or private.

The problem that happens when public, stems from the top office itself. When much of their fortune becomes tied to "share price", then tend to focus too much on that - at the expense o all other. In a private company, you still have shares and ownership, so you seek to do the same thing, but in the public view, you have to perform.

I don't think GW being public has had anything to do with their troubles. Quite simply, the current management is not capable of managing a company the size of GW. So, they will manage the company down to where they are comfortable - if the company can survive that.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:



As I have said before - I think that in the event of GW's demise the IP will be scattered among creditors, and sold off piecemeal.

In the event that it is sold off piecemeal then it becomes more possible for smaller companies to buy it.

You keep saying that, but GW really only has two intellectual properties: Warhammer 40k and Warhammer Fantasy Battle, its fairly impossible for them to subsets of that IP (factions, etc.) without including the rest of it, therefore, you're still looking at splitting the IP two ways, and the reality is that 40K is well beyond the reach of any of the companies you listed - except Hasbro - considering how much licensing they are doing with it. Fantasy would possibly be a more realistic purchase, as its generally less popular and less well known, and as has been seen games based on that IP have flopped, but honestly WHFB is such a *generic* IP that its irrelevant anyway.

Unless of course by IP you refer to things such as model designs, etc. which is a different matter entirely.

Yes, the notion that WHFB is anything original that anyone would even remotely care about from an IP perspective is ludicrous. The only IP they have that has any potential value is 40k.

My bet is they wouldn't sell it off, however. They would reduce the company to a small stable of lawyers and just look to "protect" it by suing people for the next 20 years.

Personally, I'd like to see them get rid of the current design staff and instead take on FW's design team

 jimbolina25 wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see them get rid of the current design staff and instead take on FW's design team

Then the entire game would be Marines and Guard. It's hard to get FW to do anything else.

 Wayshuba wrote:

I respectfully have to disagree. History has show, time and time again, that when a big stagnant player collapses the competition always steps in to fill the void and the market rarely suffers. Wang Computer got companies to use word processing mainstream - they died to WordPerfect, Microsoft and Lotus. Kodak was a name once synonymous with photography, now they are not in the business anymore yet more pictures are being taken now than at anytime in history (and worse, they invented the digital camera). Blockbuster were the big boys of video rental, until NetFlix and Amazon readjusted their sails.

Fact is, if GW were to die, the market would be just fine. Wargamers would take up other games and the $200 million that GW does in revenue would split out over the market. I don't think we would have another $200M company, but we would get a bunch of $40M companies filling in the gap as the revenue GW has is divided. Competing companies are all over the world now - PP in North America, Warlord Games and Mantic in Europe, Battlefront in Oceania Region, just to name a few - so the geography is covered. It would be far better in the long run for the market for their to be four or five large companies than the behemoth that is GW today.

Maybe eventually, but it would take quite a bit of time - possibly a decade. Not all who play GW games are 'wargamers' - some just like the GW universe and GW wargames are the best way to enjoy it. I, for example, would not transit to any other wargame if 40k is discontinued. Competing franchises just do not inspire me. Just like when I quit MtG, I didn't move over to Digimon or V:TES or whatever. I just quit the hobby altogether.

Backfire wrote:

 Wayshuba wrote:

I respectfully have to disagree. History has show, time and time again, that when a big stagnant player collapses the competition always steps in to fill the void and the market rarely suffers. Wang Computer got companies to use word processing mainstream - they died to WordPerfect, Microsoft and Lotus. Kodak was a name once synonymous with photography, now they are not in the business anymore yet more pictures are being taken now than at anytime in history (and worse, they invented the digital camera). Blockbuster were the big boys of video rental, until NetFlix and Amazon readjusted their sails.

Fact is, if GW were to die, the market would be just fine. Wargamers would take up other games and the $200 million that GW does in revenue would split out over the market. I don't think we would have another $200M company, but we would get a bunch of $40M companies filling in the gap as the revenue GW has is divided. Competing companies are all over the world now - PP in North America, Warlord Games and Mantic in Europe, Battlefront in Oceania Region, just to name a few - so the geography is covered. It would be far better in the long run for the market for their to be four or five large companies than the behemoth that is GW today.

Maybe eventually, but it would take quite a bit of time - possibly a decade. Not all who play GW games are 'wargamers' - some just like the GW universe and GW wargames are the best way to enjoy it. I, for example, would not transit to any other wargame if 40k is discontinued. Competing franchises just do not inspire me. Just like when I quit MtG, I didn't move over to Digimon or V:TES or whatever. I just quit the hobby altogether.

Unless I've missed something, Magic is still very much alive and the dominant CCG? You've conflated your personal choice to move on with a vacuum in the marketplace caused by the disappearance of a major player.

Besides, if many shared your opinion, it still wouldn't impact the companies remaining, sure the market as a whole may shrink, but if those already playing those games continue, then worst case scenario is business as usual.

I'd also disagree with your 10 year assertion too, I'd say 12-18 months would be absolute maximum, development lead times aren't that significant in this industry.

 cincydooley wrote:
I just think it's silly to wish list companies that don't have the resources to actually buy them.

You're in luck, because you are free not to participate in such a discussion. The fact that it is too late for that is somewhat unfortunate for everyone involved, but what is one to do?

 azreal13 wrote:

Backfire wrote:

Maybe eventually, but it would take quite a bit of time - possibly a decade. Not all who play GW games are 'wargamers' - some just like the GW universe and GW wargames are the best way to enjoy it. I, for example, would not transit to any other wargame if 40k is discontinued. Competing franchises just do not inspire me. Just like when I quit MtG, I didn't move over to Digimon or V:TES or whatever. I just quit the hobby altogether.

Unless I've missed something, Magic is still very much alive and the dominant CCG? You've conflated your personal choice to move on with a vacuum in the marketplace caused by the disappearance of a major player.

No, that was not what I was saying. I was only making an example that not everyone who plays a certain kind of game, is interested in moving to equivalent game.

 azreal13 wrote:

I'd also disagree with your 10 year assertion too, I'd say 12-18 months would be absolute maximum, development lead times aren't that significant in this industry.

Absurd. None of the other companies have even sales network anywhere as big as GW. That alone would prevent other companies capitalizing quickly. It is not even remotely comparable to something like Kodak going bankrupt. There were very few, if any, photographers who thought "Oh, Kodak is gone, I guess I will quit photographing now".

chaos0xomega wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:



As I have said before - I think that in the event of GW's demise the IP will be scattered among creditors, and sold off piecemeal.

In the event that it is sold off piecemeal then it becomes more possible for smaller companies to buy it.

You keep saying that, but GW really only has two intellectual properties: Warhammer 40k and Warhammer Fantasy Battle, its fairly impossible for them to subsets of that IP (factions, etc.) without including the rest of it, therefore, you're still looking at splitting the IP two ways, and the reality is that 40K is well beyond the reach of any of the companies you listed - except Hasbro - considering how much licensing they are doing with it. Fantasy would possibly be a more realistic purchase, as its generally less popular and less well known, and as has been seen games based on that IP have flopped, but honestly WHFB is such a *generic* IP that its irrelevant anyway.

Unless of course by IP you refer to things such as model designs, etc. which is a different matter entirely.

*EDIT* Inconceivable! (Sorry, it struck me later that I should have opened with that....)

A clarification - I am including 'dead' or 'inactive' properties.

So, Mordheim, Necromunda, Blood Bowl, Gorka Morka, Warhammer Quest, Space Marine (or Epic), Man O' War, and even the RPGs.... Yes, there are only two (three? I do not know about Blood Bowl), but with some very minor reskinning (Eldar changing back to Space Elves, Squats to Space Dwarfs, etc.) the properties can be spread around.

Given that I did not expand on what I meant... there is no way that you could have known what I meant.

The Auld Grump

Tannhauser42 wrote:Then why all the cost cutting, raising of prices, and the obvious short term cash grab releases? These things would not be necessary if their deep pockets were full of coin, but these are the signs of a company struggling to look profitable to its investors.

I'm talking actual cash positions, not revenue and profit. It's not great that they took their cash reserve and paid out the majority of it as a dividend*, but they haven't lost money in a long, long time and likely will be profitable in the next report. I'm actually going to guess that their cash position will improve slightly even if revenue and profit will be down.

They're cutting costs and raising prices to protect their margins. To make sure they're not losing money. By closing the administrative offices in each of the areas GW operates in and then covering that admin out of their UK office they save a lot of money in administration salaries. And they raise prices so that when they sell less actual boxes of figures, they make the same (or perhaps even a bit more) money. GW is in a controlled decline.

When GW puts out an interim statement that says everything is going according to expectations, that means flat or slightly falling revenue and savings from cost cutting giving them more wiggle room to still be profitable.

For something horrible to happen to GW they need to consistently lose money over a couple of reporting periods and rack up debt to cover day to day operations. That could happen in the next year or so, but it's not going to start with this upcoming reporting period.

*I think dividends are a great thing, but for a company that is not in decline and certainly not at the expense of investing in the company. By paying out their cash reserves in a dividend, they effectively announced that there's nothing they could think of doing with the money to return the company to growth. Had they paid half the amount and invested the other half back into their business, then there'd be far less reason for concern.

 Overread wrote:
Disney have done films in the past aimed at adults; although I don't recall any in recent times. That said they make sure that whilst their name is on the credits they advertise differently, Disney as a brand is very much aimed at the kids and family market. If they took over GW they'd likely have the Disney stamp on the box, but the advertising and product direction would remain the same - the only bit I'd expect to change is the possible appearance of a Space Marine rollercoaster and a few walking marines at their theme parks (aiming at the teenage market).

It wouldn't be grim dark. It's sort of like when they bought marvel - no more human torch. Can't have kids setting themselves on fire.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 jimbolina25 wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see them get rid of the current design staff and instead take on FW's design team

Then the entire game would be Marines and Guard. It's hard to get FW to do anything else.

Except when they do finally get around to anything besides those two, they're amazing. Shadow Spectres are alone amongst one of the best models the GW collective has ever produced.

Oh, Hell....

Since this is a wish scenario... I should have listed Forge World as one of the possible companies to buy out GW....

Then again... that might not be needed, since FW would have been so far in the lead that I could have worded it 'Aside From Forge World, What Company Would You Want To Buy GW?'

Because... yeah - Forge World being in charge would be awesome.

The Auld Grump

 kronk wrote:
Forge World. They do 30k better than GW does 40k.

Put Allen Blighe in charge, that crazy, beautiful bastard!

*nods sagely at this*

I think actually Forge World are an example of what GW would be like if the creative/design types had more control over what was released, rather than having the 'suits in charge' (to paraphrase from a journalist writing about the downfall of Atari).

Bandai.

We might also get 30 minute long commercials for it too.

Anyone is fine and much better than GW could possibly do. I really don't care who. I know of no entertainment company that is even 50% as bad as GW.

Backfire wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:

Backfire wrote:

Maybe eventually, but it would take quite a bit of time - possibly a decade. Not all who play GW games are 'wargamers' - some just like the GW universe and GW wargames are the best way to enjoy it. I, for example, would not transit to any other wargame if 40k is discontinued. Competing franchises just do not inspire me. Just like when I quit MtG, I didn't move over to Digimon or V:TES or whatever. I just quit the hobby altogether.

Unless I've missed something, Magic is still very much alive and the dominant CCG? You've conflated your personal choice to move on with a vacuum in the marketplace caused by the disappearance of a major player.

No, that was not what I was saying. I was only making an example that not everyone who plays a certain kind of game, is interested in moving to equivalent game.

And those players won't make the slightest difference to the overall market should their game of choice disappear, as their income was only ever going to support one company anyway, so are largely irrelevant.

 azreal13 wrote:

I'd also disagree with your 10 year assertion too, I'd say 12-18 months would be absolute maximum, development lead times aren't that significant in this industry.

Absurd. None of the other companies have even sales network anywhere as big as GW. That alone would prevent other companies capitalizing quickly. It is not even remotely comparable to something like Kodak going bankrupt. There were very few, if any, photographers who thought "Oh, Kodak is gone, I guess I will quit photographing now".

Well, we've been here before haven't we? You really need to stop asserting your opinions as some sort of fact, and therefore dismissing anyone else's opinion with nothing more substantial than "what you think."

No individual company has a sales network, and by that, I assume you mean retail chain which isn't actually the same thing, of a comparable size to GW its true, but the global independent retailer, manufacturer and distribution network is quite well developed, and as I and others have tried to explain to you in other threads, probably not too far off in terms of size.

Of course, I have no figures on hand to substantiate that, but I'm assuming I don't need any as it isn't really something you seem that bothered by.