Azreal13 wrote:
Icv2 has reported double digit growth for several years now consecutively.
Kickstarter has seen a big increase in spending on gaming related projects.
Only GW has shown any signs of stagnation, as can be seen from their financials and this very poll.
True az. But ICV2 data has to be qualified though – it refers to US and Canada, it refers to specific (independent) retailers, and as far as I’m aware it doesn’t break down the numbers and it covers a lot of geekdom – card games, board games, role-playing games, war games etc. It's useful, but its limitations must be taken into account, and can't be taken for gospel. a growth in the whole industry does not necessarily translate to a growth in wargames(which is what I was responding to), and (anecdotally of course), from my friends in the industry, the big pushers for retailers (ie the best margins) and a lot of the recent growth has been boxed/board games. Apparently, the margins for wargames are extremely small. Geek-chic is getting ‘kewl’ these days.
Kickstarter is quite an interesting phenomenon, but does it represent ‘new’ people, or the same people, just spending more money?
jonolikespie wrote:
I think your analogy is a little off, GW are no longer the giant they used to be. Those other companies have all been growing while GW has been shrinking for the last few years. GW once dominated the top two spots on Icv2's non collectible miniatures game chart, now 40k has fallen to 2nd and WHFB fell off the list entierly a couple of years back.
Actually,
GW shrinking reinforces my point (remember, I originally piped in on the topic of the player base shrinking). And the growth of other companies does not necessarily counter it. My point was in reference to whether wargames are in decline, and if the playerbase is shrinking. Remember, the headline of ‘
GW in decline, other wargames companies growing, therefore overall growth!!’ might make pleasant reading to those with the specific agenda of hating on
GW all of the time but the simple truth is that it is not as straight forward as it seems at first glance. Second place to star wars is more due to star wars being star wars than anything else. Plus being a fun, easy to get into game doesn't hurt.
Icv2 data is useful, but it is nothing more than a ‘finger in the air’ when it comes to weather forecasts. And my analogy is fine. Granted,
GW used to be the 800lb gorilla in the room. They’re still the 600lb gorilla in the room. They’ve had a rough time recently. But they seem to be shaping up a bit better – they’re making healthier ‘noises’ recently. And while the monkeys that surrounded it are bigger, the question must be asked if it is because the monkeys stole the gorilla’s food? The second thing to bear in mind is that
GW are not aiming to sell ‘lots of stuff’ to ‘lots of people’. They’re not trying to position themselves as the ‘company of the masses’. They’re selling to the high end. They’re aiming to sell less for more to a smaller, more controlled and ‘in-tune’ player base. That’s not necessarily a ‘decline’ so much as a shift in focus. And they probably don’t really care about anyone that stomps off in a huff as a result of this change in focus or gets left behind (they’re quite ruthless like that!)– so long as their margins are fine, they’re happy. If you’re not buying, you’re not a customer, and they’re no longer interested in you. And despite this, some people still are interested – as mentioned, there are still the high end ‘whales’ which is precisely where
GW wants to be.
The other wargaming companies might have been growing (and some have been doing quite well for themselves) but with the probable exception of Privateer Press they’re all small fry. And even
PP hit the wall in numbers with Mk2 (they basically did most of their hoovering up of players back in the ‘summer of discontent’ in 2011/12), hence their change in direction with Mk3 with more of a push to grab some section of the ‘casual’ market rather than just focus on the hyper-competitive one. The huge growth of
GW’s competitors must be qualified. They’re still minnows. Often with tiny, or relatively small player bases. Don’t think for a moment that I am biased against these other companies. I am a big fan of Corvus Belli for example – despite their flaws and hiccups, I really like what they do. They had hugely impressive growth last year (
iirc 75-ish percent), but they are a tiny operator compared to
GW. 30 staff compared to 1600.
GW’s player base dwarfs that of Corvus Belli (heck,
GW’s
staff probably dwarfs
CB’s, or other companies’
player base! Yes, a deliberate exaggeration, but i don’t think I’d be far off, relatively speaking.) , and the question must also be asked if the growth of the smaller companies is ‘new’ players, or if it is merely cannibalising players from
GW-that is not industry growth.
CB’s growth is a drop in the bucket for
GW. Whilst there is certainly some of the former (and a lot of it is X-wing, but I wonder how many of them initially ‘stepped in’ because star wars, and how many will step over into other miniature games. That to me represents real growth) I suspect there is a lot more of the latter than people realise, and a completely different picture emerges when you consider this – like I said, minnows can still survive, grow and thrive in an eco-system that is shrinking. It doesn’t necessarily give an accurate picture of the size, shape or overall health of that ecosystem.
Edit: I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. I just think more questions need to be asked, and I don't think that the reality is quite simple.
Peregrine wrote:
Is that counting just the employees working on design and manufacturing, or does it include the dead weight of GW's retail chain?
Both. Its in their annual reports.
AFAIK, the design studio is still over a hundred people. In any case, does it really matter? The point was to illustrate the difference in scale/size between both
GW and some of the other companies in the industry. Whilst people love pointing to the big tabloid headlines of
GW ‘failing while other companies grow hugely’ as some kind of proof of the wargames industry growing, when you read the text behind the headline, dig a bit deeper into the story, and look at the actual numbers behind the percentages, you realise that its not necessarily that simple - the numbers tell a completely different story. Huge growth (for example, Corvus Belli’s hugely impressive 75% growth last year – and like I said, im a big fan of them) must be viewed in the correct context - it is nothing more than a drop in the bucket for
GW (I’d actually love to see the sales numbers for the ‘failure’ of
AOS and compare them to the ‘success’ of Infinity
N3 and have a side by side comparison. I think it would be an interesting read). And it must be questioned whether it is sustainable long-term or if they would follow the same trends as
GW. It ‘proves’ a lot less than people think.
GW is big enough to operate a global retail chain, most other companies involved in this industry would struggle to put together the manpower to operate a corner store. Heck, most have to ask for what amounts to charity – volunteers not being paid - to do the quality control (ie playtesting) on their product.
GW turn over more cash in a week that most of these companies do in a year. That is not to discredit them either, let’s be entirely clear on that. But direct comparisons between whales and minnows need to be viewed in the right context.
hobojebus wrote:
And with all that extra staff they still make worse rules and fluff.
jonolikespie wrote:
I'd make the (totally subjective) argument they make worse models and art too these days
[
Guys, I know you both (hobo in particular) love to constantly harp on with that same old tune and put all of the hate on
GW in every thread, and turn it up to 11 every day, all of the time, whatever they do, whatever the reason, regardless of its relevance to the discussion at hand, circumstances and anything else and twist everything with the sole aim of reinforcing a particular negative viewpoint and agenda (hobo, I still remember your hysterics about how
gw were 'out of touch" with kids for using Christian mythology in their aesthetics 'because kids are atheist') , but I really have to ask what this is actually adding to the conversation beyond the fact that you have to jump on the soap box, yell the rebel yell, rabble rouse, and have a go at them whenever you inhale oxygen. After a certain point, it's just hating for the sake of hating. Come on. We're all better than that.
Sometimes, it’s just not necessary, needed or even wanted all of the time. Sometimes I think people get far too close to their hobby. Step back. Don't be Icarus flying so close to the sun.
12,000 
