Switch Theme:

GW publish their half year report.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





JWBS wrote:
Sounds like bollocks to me. There would be little point in keeping a product in inventory past three months if that were the case. May as well just design, produce, and release another, if the profit is 10x, 'old' (aka three weeks) vs new.


And would that make appearance of healthy live game for new blood?

And sales are sales with only expense being storage. Box itself is free. So the trickle sales profit is box price-cost of shelf space.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




I would imagine that any older kits that gets included in a Start collecting box have outsold its original launch period sales. That probably goes for any kit that gets bundled in some discount box.
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought





Eye of Terror

frogert_poj wrote:
I would imagine that any older kits that gets included in a Start collecting box have outsold its original launch period sales. That probably goes for any kit that gets bundled in some discount box.


Not to mention, there's reasons to keep a product around after it's initial sales period, just not in the same quantity.

"Bulk of sales" does not mean no one buys it after that period. It may mean 65% of sales happen in the first 3 weeks, but the other 35% happen over the course of 5 years. Maybe you want 100 units the first few weeks then 10 to just sit until they sell.


   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






That’s assuming the info we’re going on is even accurate.

It’s the difference between “X% of sales happen in Y period”, and “X% of the production costs are recouped in Y period”.

They’re not the same thing, especially if we can assume that similarly sized sprues have similar production costs (including design, tooling, production, box art etc). Yet the latter can easily be misconstrued or misunderstood into becoming the former.

Stuff like basic infantry? They’ll have a far higher unit sale potential than something like a character model. And a character model is likely to have a higher unit sale potential compared to a Special Character.

Basic transports (Rhino, Chimera etc) will also likely have a higher unit sale potential than a Predator, Fireprism etc, simply because you can field more in a given list.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/15 11:25:26


   
Made in at
Second Story Man





Austria

this cannot be true that the bulk of sales happens in the first 3 weeks

because if it is true, keeping only core products in stock in every single store while other items need to be ordered after a given time, would actually makes sense
the same way making a new Marine box every Edition and shuffling units into discount boxes that have lower sales as well

no, no, sales of model kits are equal distributed over the live time of the box, an Eldar Falcon sold as many copies by its release week as selling as the last Codex was released as it sold last week
because people don't like Eldar and those 3 people playing just buy a new Falcon each year
no new people who wanted the Falcon bought it in masses by release, than a lot of people bought one with the new Codex as they wanted to start an Eldar Army, and now no one is buying one as everyone waits for the new Codex

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought





Eye of Terror

Well, I'm not sure if there's a reason to interrogate GW's stocking practices. Whether or not they make perfect sense from the outside, the company makes an impressive profit.

I'm certain they act like most other companies and monitor stock through an ERP system, deliver kits to stores based on informed projections, and red shirts has some role to play in making sure the right stuff is on the shelves.

The issue with demand, from the consumer side: it goes down once you have the model. I imagine our impressions are skewed based on what we notice when we visit stores, and we probably notice the familiar above all else.

   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






I can confirm store stock has been centrally set and electronically re-ordered since around 2009, possibly before.

In times before, the manager ordered what they reckoned they needed. Which lead to cupboards full of stock.

New system also makes stock takes a doddle. Scan everything, and it works out, based on knowing what has been delivered, any discrepancies. I mean it still takes time, but so much easier than the paper and pen method.

This info true as of my last turn as a till monkey circa 2010.

   
Made in at
Second Story Man





Austria

 techsoldaten wrote:
Well, I'm not sure if there's a reason to interrogate GW's stocking practices.

a very simple view on a complex topic

if the sales are higher in the first weeks and than lower, you have more stock on release on the shelf than 2 years later, and if a kit does not sell at all after the release, you remove it from the core stock and just order it on demand
if a kit has equal sales over years, you always have the same amount of boxes on the shelf


with people now saying that is is wrong that a box sells most on release, you should not see the differences on the shelf of the store but always a similar amount of them in stock

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





If you remove all but newest it would be bad at getting new players. Shows unhealthy game for which isn't good to get into.

Also old kits are nearly pure profit so trickle sale worth still.

But sure. You know more than gw staff from inside. Random internet chap vs gw staff.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/15 13:08:13


2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

JWBS wrote:
Sounds like bollocks to me. There would be little point in keeping a product in inventory past three months if that were the case. May as well just design, produce, and release another, if the profit is 10x, 'old' (aka three weeks) vs new.


I mean that did seem to be what GW was aiming for originally with the launch of Age of Sigmar

Perhaps not quite 3 month time frames, but certainly it was setup for fast sales of small armies/factions (released in one wave) that could then be retired and a new set pushed out. Hence why they made 4 grand alliances and scrapped a lot of "armies/races" and such. That way "players" would be collecting GA armies not individual races so GW could be free to retire some and introduce others and such all the time; keeping any that sold at a decent rate around.



Also don't forget even if they sell an overwhelming majority in their launch months; there's still significant sales after that. Plus keeping older kits around encourages people to buy new kits.

It still doesn't seem "right" to me that kits make their bulk of sales in such a short time window when they might spend 10 years on the shelf and that army might go through many revivals over that period of time

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






 kodos wrote:
 techsoldaten wrote:
Well, I'm not sure if there's a reason to interrogate GW's stocking practices.

a very simple view on a complex topic

if the sales are higher in the first weeks and than lower, you have more stock on release on the shelf than 2 years later, and if a kit does not sell at all after the release, you remove it from the core stock and just order it on demand
if a kit has equal sales over years, you always have the same amount of boxes on the shelf


with people now saying that is is wrong that a box sells most on release, you should not see the differences on the shelf of the store but always a similar amount of them in stock


That doesn’t take into account that GW stores have limited shelf space. Something going direct only does not, by any means, equate to it being a slow seller in itself.

Consider how many kits GW pump out each year for 40K and AoS. Some are straight replacements, others are entirely new additions to the range. Same with BL books.

With finite shelf space, it makes sense to keep the new things available in-store, as being new, the level of demand will be of course be higher. That’s just the nature of the beast, especially if it’s an entirely new addition to its army book or codex.

But that still doesn’t mean things are moved to Direct Only because they’re gathering dust. They just sell in a lesser quantity than New Things. If every store sells say, purely for arguments sake, 1 Tectonic Frag Drill a week? That item is objectively selling and selling well. But, the new things? You might be selling five or six of those a week. Which would you prioritise your inherently finite shelf space to?

   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

I don't know why GW products would be different than basically everything else.

All products (With a couple exceptions as stuff like cocacola, etc...) have a peak volume of sales and then decline. Using games as an example, most sales are at release, and then you have smaller peaks when big DLC's, expansions, etc... are released.

Its only logical than GW products follow the same logic: Most sales at release with peaks with new editions/codex/rules for those models with campaing books, supplements, etc... and then a much slower turn rate in the periods in between.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/15 13:49:25


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

It's not that we are disputing that the new products won't have a peak of sales rate during the early months after release; but rather that that it represents the greatest amount of total sales of that kit. When models might be on sale for 10 years without being replaced.

Especially when you consider that a model is a model. It's not like a mobile phone where after 2 years newer models are in all ways superior. A Tactical Space Marine is as good in year 1 as it is in year 10. It's as viable on the table and everything.

If the kit isn't replaced then when that army gets new battletomes (That's at least 2-3 over that time span); new editions of the rules; new marketing pushes; new models released etc... Each of those events should spark a new wave of gamers returning too and starting that army.

Yes those new spikes might be lower in volume than the launch spikes; but the idea that models only sell 90% of their total lifespan stock in 3 months after launch just seems, strange to most of us. Especially when many of us have started brand new armies years after those armies were released.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in gb
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps





No one is denying an initial peak of sales at the start of a product's lifetime. The issue is the numbers. 80% of sales in the first 5% (assuming a five year run, which is generous, GW stuff lasts longer than that on average, in most cases significantly longer) of the run is the claim that has been made numerous times here over the years. The source? "I heard this once / a guy told me".
   
Made in gb
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan






JWBS wrote:
No one is denying an initial peak of sales at the start of a product's lifetime. The issue is the numbers. 80% of sales in the first 5% (assuming a five year run, which is generous, GW stuff lasts longer than that on average, in most cases significantly longer) of the run is the claim that has been made numerous times here over the years. The source? "I heard this once / a guy told me".


The numbers are definitely going to vary a lot by the individual product. I could believe 80% on the more niche / low volume stuff like named characters, while kits like core troop units are always going to have a steady trickle as people begin collecting the faction. Other stuff will be somewhere in between.

It's also pretty likely that the people who have access to the real figures are a couple degrees removed from the people repeating this stuff, so there's going to be a telephone game-effect going on when it comes to specific percentages.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/15 14:50:34


 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Thing is, when GW redo an army? They only rarely redo the whole of the line.

9th Ed is notably the exception to that rule, as quite a few armies have had or are getting quite significant updates.

Outside of that? Each Codex or Battletome released will attract new players from within the existing community.

If they’ve never played that army before, they’ll be buying the basic units and whatever more specialised stuff tickles their tactical testicles.

The Hammerhead is an excellent example right now. It’s one of the oldest kits in the Tau range, tying with the Devilfish, Kroot, Kroothounds and Krootox. It was there since day one.

Yet….it’s getting proper sick rules. Like nearly a must have. Given its been somewhat lacklustre since it’s initial release? It’s going to see an uptick in sales. All without a physical redesign.

And so I find the “X% of all sales in Y time period” to almost certainly be made up.

   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





 techsoldaten wrote:
Well, I'm not sure if there's a reason to interrogate GW's stocking practices. Whether or not they make perfect sense from the outside, the company makes an impressive profit.

I'm certain they act like most other companies and monitor stock through an ERP system, deliver kits to stores based on informed projections, and red shirts has some role to play in making sure the right stuff is on the shelves.

The issue with demand, from the consumer side: it goes down once you have the model. I imagine our impressions are skewed based on what we notice when we visit stores, and we probably notice the familiar above all else.


https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/13/games_workshop_launches_05m_at/

I think probably there are plenty of reasons to interrogate GW's stocking practices and the tech behind it, apparently GW also thinks they have some issues haha.
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dreadnought




San Jose, CA

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

The Hammerhead is an excellent example right now. It’s one of the oldest kits in the Tau range, tying with the Devilfish, Kroot, Kroothounds and Krootox. It was there since day one.

Yet….it’s getting proper sick rules. Like nearly a must have. Given its been somewhat lacklustre since it’s initial release? It’s going to see an uptick in sales. All without a physical redesign.

And so I find the “X% of all sales in Y time period” to almost certainly be made up.


It's like the mould is nearing the apex of its life and they want to tie some $€£¥ to it? Or equally plausible is that the HH mould has just been redone and they want to start it off with a bang.

Or its just the planets aligning and GW unwittingly reaping the reward.

Internally to GW, I would expect some sort of formula(used in all manufacturing) as to the life expectancy of the tool and its rate of return on investment. Who knows, GW might actually base their strategy of game OPness on tool life...
   
Made in us
Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor






Gathering the Informations.

Nah.

The Hammerhead isn't a single mould. It's built using the Devilfish kit sprues and a separate sprue just for the Hammerhead's weapon options. At some point, they also bundled in the Skyray's sprue.

TLDR? Redoing the Hammerhead would involve redoing 2 other kits as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Overread wrote:
I can well believe that there's a peak of sales volume during the first few months of a new kit going on sale. However total sales is a hard one for me too.

I could believe it for an army like Ossiarchs which had a slightly luke-warm reception and haven't seen any major kit or battletome updates since. But at the same time its a super new army; it hasn't had a big battletome update or a second wave of models released. Heck I bet the Lumineth sold a LOT of models when their second wave landed and that a good portion were first wave models.

That's a sucker's bet to anyone who actually knows what the Lumineth releases entailed.

Wave 1 was predominantly Vanari(the subfaction that essentially makes up the Tyrionic "military" side of things) units in the form of the Sentinels, Wardens, and Dawnriders. Add in the 3 dedicated character kits(the Scinari Cathallar who was mandatory in a Vanari warscroll battalion, Teclis, and the Alarith Stonemage) plus the two other Alarith Temple items(the Spirit of the Mountain which was a double-build with a named version in Avalenor and the Alarith Stoneguard unit) and it's forced synergy with weird-ish characters that people kept dumping all over.

Cut to Wave 2!
Vanari saw the addition of the Bannerblade(hero), Lord Regent(hero), named Lord-Regent who is literally supposed to be the "Voice of Tyrion"(hero), the Starshard Ballista(warmachine), and the Bladelords(a weird bodyguard-ish unit who also had a resistance to Endless Spells/Spells in general because of their flags).
Scinari saw the addition of the Loreseeker(a pseudo-return of the ol' High Elf Loremaster) and the Calligrave(the gent running around with a paintbrush).
Our second Aelemntari Temple was the Wind Temple, consisting of another 3 kits(Mage, the Windcharger archers, and the dual kit of the named/unnamed fox spirit).
Last but not least was the named twins character, which consisted of both Scinari and Vanari keywords because one was a fighter and one was a mage.


It's worth mentioning though that, again, the Vanari/Tyrionic side of things is where most of these releases are coming from. That Tyrionic side is basically described as being High Elves from the World That Was. They have chariots, they have scouts, they have mounted heroes and massed lance charges yadda yadda yadda.

It's on the Teclian side where things get weird and where GW kept seeing pushback from the "fans".

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/01/15 17:56:25


 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Australia

 Drakheart wrote:


Our epic Horus Heresy novel series is drawing close to its galaxy changing conclusion. Currently standing at over 7.5
million words, we aren’t aware of a more detailed and in-depth story in any fantasy or science fiction IP.


7.5 million, feel sorry for the guy who had to count them!


It takes Steven Erickson 7.5 million words just to describe one character stubbing their toe.
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: