GW CEO steps down/financial latest

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.

**Surtur**

-Loki- wrote:
Wehrkind wrote:
I just wanted to hop in and share some anecdotal evidence about veterans and being locked in. I have 4 large 40k armies, and haven't bought a new GW kit since Blood Angels came out. I got tired of the prices, and first switched to using counts as models (a 3000 point WHFB chaos list with about 19 GW models in it) and then just started playing Hordes. Over the past 5 years I have seen GW go from being the absolutely dominating game company in the 3 stores I played at to having a minority of players, with lots of those switching being long time GW gamers.

All that to say I think the concept of lock in is over stated now. When you don't want to spend a few hundred bucks to buy the new codex and hot power models, you start just playing the same army over and over out of your current collection, all the while eyeing up all the new, shiny games others are playing. I think the lock in effect that GW used to rely on to keep people going is starting to look less like a cell and more like a freestanding door.

I find the concept of 'lock in' due to being 'heavuly invested' kind of odd personally. If you've got a 4000pt GW army sitting there, what you don't need is more models from GW, or at least that army. It's not costing you money having them sit there.

Going and dropping $100 on a complete Malifaux or Infinity or Mercs 'army' and the rulebook isn't hurting your GW collection in the slightest (well, maybe you'll buy one less squad you don't even need because you have 4000pts sitting there). And if you decide to grab a game of Malifaux/Infinity/Mercs one day at the shop or with friends, then again, it doesn't cost you anything leaving your GW army at home.

'Lock in' due to being heavily invested simply feels like a made up excuse to not try new things.

Well let's put it this way: You had that 4k army. Then 6th hits. Flyers are now the big thing. You get a flyer released for your army. You feel in order to stay competitive you need at least one if not two. You figure that it's only $50 or what ever, it's marginal to keep your army good. After all you've already spent $1000 what's a little more gonna do? People go through this thought process regardless of factors. It's a mental trap we often fall into that has been explored by psychologists. A psych friend explained it to me and I can't remember the name of it.

**-Loki-**

Kroothawk wrote:
Keep in mind what models GW is usually releasing (apart from a few updates of existing units, that are long overdue):

Fantasy: New units with über-rules that every competitive player should have (according to GW) plus big expensive monsters.
40k: New units with über-rules that every competitive player should have (according to GW) plus big expensive flyers.

Doesn't help to have 50 standard Space Marines plus 10 tanks, when you need 5 flyers to win tournaments.
Of course, as units are rarely tested by competitive players, GW often errs what competitive must-have units are, except for many flyers and ridiculously underpriced units.

Avoiding the usual internet hyperbole - GW releasing only new kits doesn't mean you can't expand into other games. The opposite in fact.

Using my example of a 4k point army, on an edition change, you'll only be buying a few new units to stay 'competitive'. Last edition, you would have bought a few tanks. This edition, a flyer or two.

Then you have approximately a 4 year wait until when you will be buying the next new releases. Even with multiple armies, you'll usually only be buying 3-4 kits every year if you've got huge armies already (and thus are 'heavily invested'). Not to mention that while people like to play the hate game and spout that every new release is absolutely 356% essential to remaining competitive with a new codex, the reality is very few new kits are must haves (Grey Knights, Dark Eldar and Necrons are exceptions since the entire list for them was revamped).

Basically, 'heavily invested' means you should have ample opportunity to expand into another game, compared to someone who is only just getting started whose next purchases are going to definitely be GW products as they're still building their core army.

**holycow**

sunken cost fallacy, surtur

**-Loki-**

Surtur wrote:
-Loki- wrote:
Wehrkind wrote:
I just wanted to hop in and share some anecdotal evidence about veterans and being locked in. I have 4 large 40k armies, and haven't bought a new GW kit since Blood Angels came out. I got tired of the prices, and first switched to using counts as models (a 3000 point WHFB chaos list with about 19 GW models in it) and then just started playing Hordes. Over the past 5 years I have seen GW go from being the absolutely dominating game company in the 3 stores I played at to having a minority of players, with lots of those switching being long time GW gamers.

All that to say I think the concept of lock in is over stated now. When you don't want to spend a few hundred bucks to buy the new codex and hot power models, you start just playing the same army over and over out of your current collection, all the while eyeing up all the new, shiny games others are playing. I think the lock in effect that GW used to rely on to keep people going is starting to look less like a cell and more like a freestanding door.

I find the concept of 'lock in' due to being 'heavuly invested' kind of odd personally. If you've got a 4000pt GW army sitting there, what you don't need is more models from GW, or at least that army. It's not costing you money having them sit there.

Going and dropping $100 on a complete Malifaux or Infinity or Mercs 'army' and the rulebook isn't hurting your GW collection in the slightest (well, maybe you'll buy one less squad you don't even need because you have 4000pts sitting there). And if you decide to grab a game of Malifaux/Infinity/Mercs one day at the shop or with friends, then again, it doesn't cost you anything leaving your GW army at home.

'Lock in' due to being heavily invested simply feels like a made up excuse to not try new things.

Well let's put it this way: You had that 4k army. Then 6th hits. Flyers are now the big thing. You get a flyer released for your army. You feel in order to stay competitive you need at least one if not two. You figure that it's only $50 or what ever, it's marginal to keep your army good. After all you've already spent $1000 what's a little more gonna do? People go through this thought process regardless of factors. It's a mental trap we often fall into that has been explored by psychologists. A psych friend explained it to me and I can't remember the name of it.

So buying two kits every 4 years is an inhibition to trying something new?

Again - if you have that huge army, you're not buying much anymore. Even with a new codex, unless GW decides to redo everything like Dark Eldar or Necrons. Which they've said they won't be doing anymore anyway (and they don't need to, as they were the last of 40k's old armies).

I agree there's a psycological aspect to it, but I really just don't get it. I don't look at people playing Hordes and think 'man, I might buy a $90 Harpy in a year when GW finally release one, I better not try another game'.

**TedNugent**

Pretty clear indication what Wells' business model was - short term gains, short term profit, looks good on a resume, see you later guys.

**Surtur**

-Loki- wrote:
Surtur wrote:
-Loki- wrote:
Wehrkind wrote:
I just wanted to hop in and share some anecdotal evidence about veterans and being locked in. I have 4 large 40k armies, and haven't bought a new GW kit since Blood Angels came out. I got tired of the prices, and first switched to using counts as models (a 3000 point WHFB chaos list with about 19 GW models in it) and then just started playing Hordes. Over the past 5 years I have seen GW go from being the absolutely dominating game company in the 3 stores I played at to having a minority of players, with lots of those switching being long time GW gamers.

All that to say I think the concept of lock in is over stated now. When you don't want to spend a few hundred bucks to buy the new codex and hot power models, you start just playing the same army over and over out of your current collection, all the while eyeing up all the new, shiny games others are playing. I think the lock in effect that GW used to rely on to keep people going is starting to look less like a cell and more like a freestanding door.

I find the concept of 'lock in' due to being 'heavuly invested' kind of odd personally. If you've got a 4000pt GW army sitting there, what you don't need is more models from GW, or at least that army. It's not costing you money having them sit there.

Going and dropping $100 on a complete Malifaux or Infinity or Mercs 'army' and the rulebook isn't hurting your GW collection in the slightest (well, maybe you'll buy one less squad you don't even need because you have 4000pts sitting there). And if you decide to grab a game of Malifaux/Infinity/Mercs one day at the shop or with friends, then again, it doesn't cost you anything leaving your GW army at home.

'Lock in' due to being heavily invested simply feels like a made up excuse to not try new things.

Well let's put it this way: You had that 4k army. Then 6th hits. Flyers are now the big thing. You get a flyer released for your army. You feel in order to stay competitive you need at least one if not two. You figure that it's only $50 or what ever, it's marginal to keep your army good. After all you've already spent $1000 what's a little more gonna do? People go through this thought process regardless of factors. It's a mental trap we often fall into that has been explored by psychologists. A psych friend explained it to me and I can't remember the name of it.

So buying two kits every 4 years is an inhibition to trying something new?

Again - if you have that huge army, you're not buying much anymore. Even with a new codex, unless GW decides to redo everything like Dark Eldar or Necrons. Which they've said they won't be doing anymore anyway (and they don't need to, as they were the last of 40k's old armies).

I agree there's a psycological aspect to it, but I really just don't get it. I don't look at people playing Hordes and think 'man, I might buy a $90 Harpy in a year when GW finally release one, I better not try another game'.

Thank you holycow!

It's not every 4 years though. Say land speeders become the in thing, 30 bucks a pop you tell yourself it's not that much. Bike armies are new hat, you figure two ravenwing battleboxes should be enough, not that much right? You want a dreadnaught spammy army, a tech marine and a few more dread kits and you'll be set. It isn't logical because people have logical fallacies. It isn't "I'm not starting hordes because" it's "I should buy these because"

**chris_valera**

Sean_OBrien wrote:
Keep in mind when comparing this years 6 month period to last years 6 month period...last year did not include the "Black Friday" weekend and subsequent "Cyber Monday" which are historically very large retail days in the US (and I would think with Christmas being a somewhat global thing - a tick up in toy sales for the rest of the world as well).

5 days of sales during the Christmas season would likely well and good account for the whole of the difference between last years numbers and this years numbers.

GW has stated Christmas is a double-month for them, and doesn't make their year.

RiTides wrote:
It's hard to grasp how much some things have increased with the general numbers, so let me show you guys a picture

On the left is the old Orc boyz box, before the new army book came out. There are 20 in the box, and the price is hard to read in the photo, but it is $35. That makes it $1.75 per model, which is somewhat reasonable given that you can get it on sale, but you need a Lot of these models.

On the right is the new Orc boyz box. It looks a little thinner, right? And hey, it's cheaper, too! But it turns out there are only 10 in the box now, for $29. That makes it $2.90 per model.

Going from $1.75 per model to $2.90 per model is a 66% price increase. And this is on the main core unit of the army, which you need a Lot of to play, the sculpt of which has not changed in a long time.

This is why almost every Orcs & Goblins player I see is a legacy player- either they've been playing forever, or they got their army used from someone who had been. GW has literally priced themselves out of having anyone but a very Tiny fraction of people start a new Orcs & Goblins army. A smarter long-term business move would be to keep the core of the army cheap, to lure players in, and cash in when they want to buy the more exotic/expensive units.

I think Mark Wells has seen that things are not good, and The Hobbit is not going to buoy them as much as they thought (note the stack of boxes in the picture although these are LOTR I believe, The Hobbit is still upfront, gathering dust in a different part of the store) and it was a good time to jump ship.

I agree. The cost to start a Warhammer army is astronomical, and I don't think The Hobbit did what it needed to do. Some places are already blowing it out at 25% off.

noneoftheabove0 wrote:
I hate to be the one to bring this up, but despite the endless predictions of hellfire and brimstone, I don't think GW is going to crash and burn. The problem is, for most people, this hobby is a small addiction. I'm not saying I'd be buying my kits from a pusher in the alley behind the library, but it's not far off from that. The prices will go up, but I feel many of us, myself included, will whine and moan but would eventually just open our wallets up a little bit further. And I think they know that.

Not me. I passed on getting involved with The Hobbit, and made a thread about it; http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/501234.page

I switched to buying novels and only now I barely keep up on the HH books. The stuf FW comes out with (The Fellblade, etc) seems ludicrous to me.

silent25 wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
oh, conspiracy theory time! Rat leaving a sinking ship or pushed out by Kirby in a power struggle? Maybe Wells has seen the sales figures for The Hobbit and has decided to go before the next quarter's financials are published.

There might not be much to this story, people move from one company to another all the time, maybe he just had a better offer. Anyway, I doubt this will make a great difference to the customer.

Kirby was brought in by Bryan Ansell when he bought out Steve Jackson back in the mid 80's. Kirby bought out Bryan Ansell back in the late 80's/early 90's and took GW public. Kirby heading to the US may have signaled Wells trying to relegate/oust Kirby in turn. Possibility board/ major shareholders were not happy with Well's direction/decisions. Given the Hobbit release does not factor into these numbers, but are know by GW, may be the real reason for his departure. Failure of a very anticipated product is normally grounds for upper management to fall in its sword.

Interesting theory. I liked The Hobbit, and thought it was all great stuff, it's just the startup costs were far too much to seriously consider. The Reaper kickstarter got my money.

ironicsilence wrote:
the timing does seem odd for someone to buy 17% voting rights in the company

A fan-led takeover, brilliant! I imaging hordes of sweaty cheetoh-stained neckbeards furiously writing letters to management as we speak...

WarOne wrote:
RiTides wrote:
Tom Kirby wrote:“We discussed this for a while and Mark preferred a clean break,” said Mr Kirby, who added he would be in the job for at least a year until an internal candidate is found.

Who could've guessed it!

Also...

Spawn of Satan a.k.a. Head of GW wrote:
“North America is going very well,” said Mr Kirby. “We’re looking at 700-800 stores in the US in the extreme long term and we’ve got 80 at the moment with plans to open 1-20 stores per year.”

Sooo...a GW at every corner?

That's the European model, which hasn't worked in the US so far, for 20+ years now. Many people say their marriage to an antiquated retail chain is what drags them down, but GW seems quite happy with it.

Kroothawk wrote:
I think, with 40€ Codices, DA prices and the Hobbit fiasco, we are just experiencing this tipping point.

I have to agree. I skipped out on both the CSM and DA codeciis, evn though I bought Dark Vengeance and wanted to start both. The start-up costs were just too much. I'm "locked-in" but apparently not buying....

TedNugent wrote:
Pretty clear indication what Wells' business model was - short term gains, short term profit, looks good on a resume, see you later guys.

He's been going on about selling the company for a while now. Changing jobs though, that's new. Maybe he was shopping around his resume, the entire time...

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

**Sean_OBrien**

chris_valera wrote:
Sean_OBrien wrote:
Keep in mind when comparing this years 6 month period to last years 6 month period...last year did not include the "Black Friday" weekend and subsequent "Cyber Monday" which are historically very large retail days in the US (and I would think with Christmas being a somewhat global thing - a tick up in toy sales for the rest of the world as well).

5 days of sales during the Christmas season would likely well and good account for the whole of the difference between last years numbers and this years numbers.

GW has stated Christmas is a double-month for them, and doesn't make their year.

Taking them at their word...

Christmas = 2 x average month = 15.38% of the yearly sales.

This year has roughly one third of the Christmas season on the books for the 6 month period - so roughly an extra 5% over last years 6 month period. That would mean that you just have to find 2% or so between things like the Hobbit. That would also assume a mostly even split across the whole season as opposed to being weighted towards the front with Black Friday and Cyber Monday (plus other factors which tend to shift the sales towards the beginning of the season as opposed to the end).

So - yes, largely my conclusions still hold. They were never about "making their year" just a statement of how the change in calender reporting would impact the 6 month periods.

**NuggzTheNinja**

We should Kickstart DakkaDakka purchasing a sizeable chunk of GW. Just enough to fix the damn problems.

Considering fans blow $50 on a codex or a box of minis, expecting a $25-50 contribution from every fan...curious what that would net.

**Zatsuku**

I stopped buying GW models a few years ago, but I kept buying every codex and army book that came out because I loved to read them and I have a shelf of like every codex and armybook. I have not bought a single hard cover one. It's over GW, I'm sorry.

**CIsaac**

While my Dark Angels will always remain my first Mini gaming love (and I'll probably continue to buy stuff for them), the idea of starting a Fantasy army was just beyond my wallet even though I've been really wanting to do one for a while.

Instead of buying from GW (or even the FLGS), I ended up taking advantage of the Mantic KoW kickstarter. I now have a massive Dwarf army and a Celestial army on the way. The Dwarves easily "count as" any possible GW force I could think of (even having a box of AoW Berserkers to count as Slayers). It wouldn't be an issue if GW didn't price itself out of my budget.

**Adam LongWalker**

Spawn of Satan a.k.a. Head of GW wrote:
“North America is going very well,” said Mr Kirby. “We’re looking at 700-800 stores in the US in the extreme long term and we’ve got 80 at the moment with plans to open 1-20 stores per year.”

Heh that is kind of funny, since back in 03 they had close to 100 stores in the US. That was their "great launch". In a couple of years they lost the South as they could not make any money at the time.

And yes they will probably open at least 10 stores this year. After of course they close down 10 or so stores that they have saturated the area of their influence.

**agustin**

The one employee stores makes it very easy and relatively cheap for them to test the waters in a location. If they can find cheap rent, they can put in a store for quite a low investment and if it doesn't work out there, close it just as quickly.

When the current GW talks about opening stores, they are not the Games Workshop Hobby Centres of yester-year.

**xraytango**

Adam LongWalker wrote:
Spawn of Satan a.k.a. Head of GW wrote:
“North America is going very well,” said Mr Kirby. “We’re looking at 700-800 stores in the US in the extreme long term and we’ve got 80 at the moment with plans to open 1-20 stores per year.”

Heh that is kind of funny, since back in 03 they had close to 100 stores in the US. That was their "great launch". In a couple of years they lost the South as they could not make any money at the time.

And yes they will probably open at least 10 stores this year. After of course they close down 10 or so stores that they have saturated the area of their influence.

You mean like having eleven stores in the greater Chicago area, but nothing in say Ohio, a state that I have noted over the years has a high amount of hobby shops per capita. We see them expanding into many areas now that have been serviced by FLGS for over 35 years in some cases. In the south I think there were two GW "outlets" that were located one in Florida and one in Georgia, but they were both in high rent mall locations in upscale malls.

**Rainbow Dash**

i've never seen a GW store open anywhere near me, just close

**xraytango**

I would think that there should be only one in each major city, unless traffic patterns or population density make it necessary to have more than one, but no more than two for any population center. FREX: 1 in NYC, 1 in Buffalo, 1 in Pittsburgh, 1 in Philly, 1 in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnatti, Louisville, Lexington, Ashland/Huntington, 2 in Atlanta (one north, one south) etc. Et al. Ad nauseum..

If they gave the job to me I could cover the whole US market in less than 70 stores, I would then use the savings in an aggressive print advertising campaign in every hobby, or "geek-centric" (yes even video game) magazine there is.

**BryllCream**

Surtur wrote:

PS, don't bro me.

Why not, bro?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

xraytango wrote:

If they gave the job to me I could cover the whole US market in less than 70 stores, I would then use the savings in an aggressive print advertising campaign in every hobby, or "geek-centric" (yes even video game) magazine there is.

I bet you £100 every single person who picks up a nerdy magazine has heard of 40k. Chances are, they already have strong opinions on it. You'd waste the money on that "marketing" campaign and be hounded out of the job within 6 months.

**Herzlos**

BryllCream wrote:

xraytango wrote:

If they gave the job to me I could cover the whole US market in less than 70 stores, I would then use the savings in an aggressive print advertising campaign in every hobby, or "geek-centric" (yes even video game) magazine there is.

I bet you £100 every single person who picks up a nerdy magazine has heard of 40k. Chances are, they already have strong opinions on it. You'd waste the money on that "marketing" campaign and be hounded out of the job within 6 months.

You vastly overestimate the awareness of GW. Most older model-type or gamer hobbyists will have at least heard of GW, but there will be many that know nothing about it, or about anything they've done recently (like The Hobbit - an advertising campaign in any geek related press would have had a huge impact on awareness). And then there's younger console gamers who may never have heard of GW.

**Bikeninja**

In reference to the discussion about GW's management, Apocalypse 40k has reported the LA Battle Bunker is closing down and becoming a 1 man store with no game room. The old Manager has moved to the Memphis Battle Bunker. As long as FLGS or whatever you call them have a place to play GW will never be able to close them down. In my opinion.

**Hulksmash**

That's sad news about the LA Bunker. That store has been there for well over a decade.

**BryllCream**

Herzlos wrote:
BryllCream wrote:

xraytango wrote:

If they gave the job to me I could cover the whole US market in less than 70 stores, I would then use the savings in an aggressive print advertising campaign in every hobby, or "geek-centric" (yes even video game) magazine there is.

I bet you £100 every single person who picks up a nerdy magazine has heard of 40k. Chances are, they already have strong opinions on it. You'd waste the money on that "marketing" campaign and be hounded out of the job within 6 months.

You vastly overestimate the awareness of GW. Most older model-type or gamer hobbyists will have at least heard of GW, but there will be many that know nothing about it, or about anything they've done recently (like The Hobbit - an advertising campaign in any geek related press would have had a huge impact on awareness). And then there's younger console gamers who may never have heard of GW.

Well in the UK any young nerd would certainly have heard of warhammer. Even most people who aren't nerds know what it is, if only because of their presence on every high street. And "younger console gamers" would like as not have played, or at least heard of, Space Marine.

The notion of warhammer being unheard of, I'm unfamiliar with. Maybe that's an American thing.

**Wehrkind**

Surtur wrote:
-Loki- wrote:
Surtur wrote:
-Loki- wrote:
Wehrkind wrote:
I just wanted to hop in and share some anecdotal evidence about veterans and being locked in. I have 4 large 40k armies, and haven't bought a new GW kit since Blood Angels came out. I got tired of the prices, and first switched to using counts as models (a 3000 point WHFB chaos list with about 19 GW models in it) and then just started playing Hordes. Over the past 5 years I have seen GW go from being the absolutely dominating game company in the 3 stores I played at to having a minority of players, with lots of those switching being long time GW gamers.

All that to say I think the concept of lock in is over stated now. When you don't want to spend a few hundred bucks to buy the new codex and hot power models, you start just playing the same army over and over out of your current collection, all the while eyeing up all the new, shiny games others are playing. I think the lock in effect that GW used to rely on to keep people going is starting to look less like a cell and more like a freestanding door.

I find the concept of 'lock in' due to being 'heavuly invested' kind of odd personally. If you've got a 4000pt GW army sitting there, what you don't need is more models from GW, or at least that army. It's not costing you money having them sit there.

Going and dropping $100 on a complete Malifaux or Infinity or Mercs 'army' and the rulebook isn't hurting your GW collection in the slightest (well, maybe you'll buy one less squad you don't even need because you have 4000pts sitting there). And if you decide to grab a game of Malifaux/Infinity/Mercs one day at the shop or with friends, then again, it doesn't cost you anything leaving your GW army at home.

'Lock in' due to being heavily invested simply feels like a made up excuse to not try new things.

Well let's put it this way: You had that 4k army. Then 6th hits. Flyers are now the big thing. You get a flyer released for your army. You feel in order to stay competitive you need at least one if not two. You figure that it's only $50 or what ever, it's marginal to keep your army good. After all you've already spent $1000 what's a little more gonna do? People go through this thought process regardless of factors. It's a mental trap we often fall into that has been explored by psychologists. A psych friend explained it to me and I can't remember the name of it.

So buying two kits every 4 years is an inhibition to trying something new?

Again - if you have that huge army, you're not buying much anymore. Even with a new codex, unless GW decides to redo everything like Dark Eldar or Necrons. Which they've said they won't be doing anymore anyway (and they don't need to, as they were the last of 40k's old armies).

I agree there's a psycological aspect to it, but I really just don't get it. I don't look at people playing Hordes and think 'man, I might buy a $90 Harpy in a year when GW finally release one, I better not try another game'.

Thank you holycow!

It's not every 4 years though. Say land speeders become the in thing, 30 bucks a pop you tell yourself it's not that much. Bike armies are new hat, you figure two ravenwing battleboxes should be enough, not that much right? You want a dreadnaught spammy army, a tech marine and a few more dread kits and you'll be set. It isn't logical because people have logical fallacies. It isn't "I'm not starting hordes because" it's "I should buy these because"

Actually, it is not the fallacy of sunk costs, but the opposite, getting sunk costs right. You already blew the previous 4000$, and you are not getting it back, so what's another 60$ now for a flyer? Of course you would be ignoring the opportunity costs of selling your stuff and investing heavily in coke and hookers.
As to buying the new hotness, when I was playing pretty seriously, I would get pretty pissed when the meta swung heavily away from the army I had bought, converted and painted. I do know some people who just reprimed their space marines and bought a new kit every codex, but I think the guys who really worked at their stuff didn't see a new codex as opening a new window of opportunity as much as closing your dick in a drawer while opening the curtains.
And maybe it was mostly just me and Salvage, but I think a lot of us did like playing the strange, no model exists yet and it isn't too good units, and just built our own or got some counts as. I think players like that are pretty hard pressed to turn in their custom built War Shrines for a kit when they come out 3 years later.

**Rainbow Dash**

I always looked at it like "I have saved this much, how can I save more and get the best deal"
I hardly buy new (unless I simply can't find it used, say snotlings, or paint, and once in a blue moon a novel (the prices are the same compared to other novels

**Asherian Command**

Dear Dakka Dakka. please make a kick starter to buy voting rights.

**Davylove21**

This is an almost totally meaningless event

**Herzlos**

BryllCream wrote:

Well in the UK any young nerd would certainly have heard of warhammer. Even most people who aren't nerds know what it is, if only because of their presence on every high street. And "younger console gamers" would like as not have played, or at least heard of, Space Marine.

The notion of warhammer being unheard of, I'm unfamiliar with. Maybe that's an American thing.

I wouldn't bet on every young nerd to know enough about GW for there to be no benefit in advertising to them. All they might know is that there's some company that makes toys like the Spare Marines in the console game, or that it's that shop with the models in the window. I know most nerds my age (30) have heard of them, but when i was growing up you could by Warhammer 40K (2nd Ed) starter sets in Argos. Now you're unlikely to find out much about the games without seeking it out.

**wildger**

It appears that some people have been living in a cave for too long. The concept of "lock-in" is down right stupid. People who spent more than $1K on GW is fully capable of having money on other games. If you are the exceptions due to tight budget, you should try to make more money other than wasting your time here.

Time is a more important factor than money alone. If you play another game, you simply cannot play WH or 40K at the same time. How many evening and weekends can you spare?

I can't comment on teenagers in UK. In NA, they know LOTR but I rarely find them to have any interest in 40K or WHFB these days.

**UNCLEBADTOUCH**

The concept of lock-in doesn't prevent you trying other games but it does keep you pumping some money back into that system as people want to keep their current investment up to date and playable. Think of your GW collection as a car, yes you can buy other cars but if you want to keep it usable then you will tax it, insure it and service it.

**SoloFalcon1138**

Still not seeing any discussion as to why we care who the head of GW happens to be...

**chris_valera**

Bikeninja wrote:
In reference to the discussion about GW's management, Apocalypse 40k has reported the LA Battle Bunker is closing down and becoming a 1 man store with no game room. The old Manager has moved to the Memphis Battle Bunker. As long as FLGS or whatever you call them have a place to play GW will never be able to close them down. In my opinion.

Oh wow, man, things are worse than I thought.

Hulksmash wrote:
That's sad news about the LA Bunker. That store has been there for well over a decade.

Yeah, but honestly, they set up that store and The Block at Orange to siphon sales from Brookhurst Hobbies.