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.

nkelsch wrote:
Didn't we just have a thread where uninformed wishlisting on how to fix GW was done?

So we have:
1. Lose money through price cuts.
2. Waste money running organized play which is already being done 'for free' by indy TOs.
3. Waste More Money as FAQ updates are 'fine' and the issue is people want free rules.
4. Waste time and money, The target audience speaks with their wallet. The angry non-customers want an avenue they don't deserve.

5. ????

6. Profit?

Yeah, this is a good thread.

Why are you so definitively certain about all of this?

 MisterMoon wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
Didn't we just have a thread where uninformed wishlisting on how to fix GW was done?

So we have:
1. Lose money through price cuts.
2. Waste money running organized play which is already being done 'for free' by indy TOs.
3. Waste More Money as FAQ updates are 'fine' and the issue is people want free rules.
4. Waste time and money, The target audience speaks with their wallet. The angry non-customers want an avenue they don't deserve.

5. ????

6. Profit?

Yeah, this is a good thread.

Why are you so definitively certain about all of this?

This.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/505410.page


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Flashman wrote:

3. Release new supported specialist games - just imagine the box sets they could do for teams/gangs/warbands these days and tell me they wouldn't fly off the shelves

Unless GW have a major overhaul they are just too inefficient.

They can barely keep up with having two core properties and a multi year licence to update.

I suspect that one of the reason Specialist games got specialist treatment is that they were just too intensive to keep going with very little reward.

Everyone who wants price reductions or price freezes needs to realize that GW is in a spiral when it comes to revenue. Their previous year's price increase means that less people are buying less, so if they don't increase prices, their total revenue will fall. They're stuck and have to keep increasing prices.

You can't fix GW by keeping the same customer experience and charging less. If you want to fix it, you need to reevaluate everything from the ground up and have the new approach bring in money that would allow you to not have to increase prices. Just freezing or decreasing prices without first addressing the underlying reason for the price increases would destroy GW.

And addressing the underlying problems might take years of having to keep going with the current price hikes until real volume growth makes not increasing prices possible again.

I don't think it is that simple. Yes, they are currently structured on price increase. But! If the other determinants of demand outside of just price change, they could probably get away with price reductions.

Of course, that's a rather more complicated answer than just 'charge less, buy more' since the determinants of demand are more complicated in themselves.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
They still are the biggest company in the world, and still probably the biggest by far. I'd like to see statistics for non-western countries with emerging markets like China, Singapore, India, Russia etc. Even other European countries such as Italy or Greece or Poland - what games are played there? I think that because GW have so many armies and factions there will be something for everyone (I'm not saying the miniatures are better, just that there's a lot of them - you've got guys in power armour, Elves fighting alongside trees, Orcs fighting Renaissance Germans or Gestapo-like future warriors, the average human in stereotypical power armour etc). And I doubt very much that many of you started wargaming because you thought the rules were solid - you probably started due to the models! When I first saw WM being sold in a shop, I thought to myself "Now, does anyone actually play this?"

But there certainly is a few things that GW could definitely do, and I agree with the guys points. Just a quick question: what's wrong with Throne of Skulls?

I underlined this misconception. GW DO NOT I REPEAT DO NOT HAVE MANY ARMIES TO PLAY. 5-6 year old codexes or codexes that were made for a previous edition of the game. IS NOT A PLAYABLE ARMY if you want to stay competetive. And Some Old codexes are so broken that they will be sure to get NERFED the next time they get a codex in 4-5 years...

FACT.. Privateer Released new CODEXES for all their FACTION in ONE YEAR... Their new releases has something for ALL FACTIONS, Warmachine or HORDES.. Privateer have Balanced rules, that you can play competetive with. We use Death clocks just like Chess when we play steamroller rules. It's highly competetive and fun.

The worst thing about GWs 40k/fantasy is that you really dont have to think, you can now mesure everything "yawn" and shoot 72 inches.. there are no rules if you get attacked in the back "you just turn around". And things like Jaws of the world wolf are just broken. The lack of needing any skills to win fantasy/40k is what really breaks the game for me. I used to play chess competetivly, and in warmachine we keep track of wins/losses on our scoreboard, and I have about 80% win ratio playing regulary against 15 diffrent people. GW on the other hand is just luck based garbage.. and as i said you cant hold offical tournaments when the gaming rules are BROKEN... competetive players wont show up to play Unbalanced crap..

And to answer your questions, I started playing Table top games when i was about 14.. back in the 80s. I have never liked games workshop, because the rules have always sucked balls. But I was forced to play it because my other friends did. I stoped playing when I was about 16.. and came back to the hobby again in 2010.. Stupid friends still wanted to play 40k/fantasy OFC. But lucky for me they wernt little kidds anymore and soon I had everyone onboard about how broken GW games are. Then I Found Warmachine.. the HOLY -edited by insaniak/ Please do not circumvent the language filter - GRAIL of table top gaming. And it took about 2 games and then everyone switched over, and we havent turned back. That is how good Warmachine/hords is compared to GW.. You play it a few times and you cant really play 40k/fantasy again, because the game mechanic in GWs games are for dummies.
Lucky for those with a brain there are other good games coming out Like malifaux. Its about time for everyone to get into the 21st century, GW is a hasbeen company that only. survives because of nostalgia. They treat us older players like crap, they spend their time making lawsuits against fly sized companies, when they could be spending their money making balanced rules instead. Finecast is a joke... Codex updates are slower then New Edtion updates of the core rules LOLZ.. the list goes on and on.. Time to get off the Titanic people before you go down with the ship...

I

 Flashman wrote:


2. Freeze prices for at least two years.

That really wouldnt matter much. The average persons wages arent growing to the point where $75 will mean significantly less in 2 years than it does now.

Lets be honest here...we arent talking about $5 or so making a huge difference...especially considering the average online discount will reduce most products by at least that amount. The problem is people are cringing at even the discounted prices, which average around 20% less than retail. GW would need at least a 25-30% cut in prices, but that only deals with the price issue, which is not GWs only problem.

The next big problem is hardest for the fans to admit...and thats the fact that the game sucks. Its terrible. GW is sitting on a great fluff set, some great minis and models, but the game lets it down. If you get down to it many of the current players tolerate the terrible rules because of the fluff and minis. The only people who actually like the current rules are WAAC gamers, who take full advantage of the power creep with every new army release.

The game itself was the final thing to push me away. I was ready to drop a big chunk of money on a new Tau army, rulebook, codex, etc. However anytime I got to reading any threads about how the game worked it left me saying to myself "wow, I really dont want to play this game". I like the minis, but the rules are such a huge turn-off. The crazy prices just sealed the deal.

The best way to save GW is this:

Keep the fluff, the majority of the mini line, get rid if Finecast, then scrap the rest of it all. Completely new rules. Not a small change, not a marginal change, completely new rules. Next would be to reduce pricing by 25% or so, and keep it there for a while. Sadly that would require GW to show losses to its shareholders for a year or two as they restructured almost the whole company, so we know it wont happen.

GW is going to ride its current model until its obviously gone over the cliff and stockholders start jumping ship. Then someone will grab it all up and sell the IP, hopefully to someone who can do it justice, since the current GW isnt.

Until that day Ill be playing Warmachine, Blackwater Gulch, and a few other games....

 agustin wrote:
Everyone who wants price reductions or price freezes needs to realize that GW is in a spiral when it comes to revenue. Their previous year's price increase means that less people are buying less, so if they don't increase prices, their total revenue will fall. They're stuck and have to keep increasing prices.

That's not true, or at best only true to an extent. Long running successful businesses do it by making the customer happy and offering a service that consumers feel is worth or exceeds the actual price. If your sales are already falling because customers don't see the worth in your product, raising prices only kills them off faster. The idea you have to make as much off each sale is a poor business practice and you should instead be focusing on making as much per sale while ensuring the customer returns for future sales. There's a lot of things wrong with GW that might get consumers to abandon them and go elsewhere, price gouging the few that remain is not the way to equalise profits unless you very rapidly want to get rid of the remaining customers as well.

 Mad4Minis wrote:


Until that day Ill be playing Warmachine,

Which has the same premium pricing model as GW and bases their prices and raises them to be on par with GW's individual models and boxed sets.

nkelsch wrote:

 Mad4Minis wrote:


Until that day Ill be playing Warmachine,

Which has the same premium pricing model as GW and bases their prices and raises them to be on par with GW's individual models and boxed sets.

but is cheaper since games aren't as big and numbers aren't that numerous

nkelsch wrote:

 Mad4Minis wrote:


Until that day Ill be playing Warmachine,

Which has the same premium pricing model as GW and bases their prices and raises them to be on par with GW's individual models and boxed sets.

I have yet to see a $60 40mm model from Privateer.

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 Mad4Minis wrote:


Until that day Ill be playing Warmachine,

Which has the same premium pricing model as GW and bases their prices and raises them to be on par with GW's individual models and boxed sets.

but is cheaper since games aren't as big and numbers aren't that numerous

So if a game uses 3 models per side, each one can be 95$ because individual model prices can't be compared to models of similar size, material and sculpting?

PP has some models which are the same as their 40k counterparts, some more expensive, some less expensive. They have 40-50$ single models and 50-60$ boxes which is 'expensive' when compared to other manufacturers. PP is a 'premium' product which knowingly prices their models for what the market can bear... and they see people will pay these prices not just in GW's realm but in PP's realm too.

Smaller games doesn't make individual models cheaper... that is a delusional state people who own 7 armies and are addicted to models claim.

nkelsch wrote:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

 Mad4Minis wrote:


Until that day Ill be playing Warmachine,

Which has the same premium pricing model as GW and bases their prices and raises them to be on par with GW's individual models and boxed sets.

but is cheaper since games aren't as big and numbers aren't that numerous

So if a game uses 3 models per side, each one can be 95$ because individual model prices can't be compared to models of similar size, material and sculpting?

PP has some models which are the same as their 40k counterparts, some more expensive, some less expensive. They have 40-50$ single models and 50-60$ boxes which is 'expensive' when compared to other manufacturers. PP is a 'premium' product which knowingly prices their models for what the market can bear... and they see people will pay these prices not just in GW's realm but in PP's realm too.

Smaller games doesn't make individual models cheaper... that is a delusional state people who own 7 armies and are addicted to models claim.

If you do your reserch.. you can buy a highly competetive 35pts army alot cheaper for warmachine. My second army in warmachine is Menoth for example.. I have a highly competetive list, because when I bought it a few weeks back I knew with over 2 years experince exacly what i wanted in the army. If you are happy running the same list or need to know your list in and out for example we play steamroller with deathclock timers. And when you do this you have to be an expert on your list, to save time... and not lose.
So I would argue that Warmachine/hordes from PP is alot cheaper then 40k/WHFB, if you want it to be. Because making a highly competetive list do not require more miniatures, just the correct modells that you plan on using...

 Warboss Gubbinz wrote:
GW didhave an Outreach Manager but she left in October.

Are you referring to Megan Lochte? I think she was gone in August, after everything that happened and all that.

Nucflash wrote:


If you do your reserch.. you can buy a highly competetive 35pts army alot cheaper for warmachine. My second army in warmachine is Menoth for example.. I have a highly competetive list, because when I bought it a few weeks back I knew with over 2 years experince exacly what i wanted in the army. If you are happy running the same list or need to know your list in and out for example we play steamroller with deathclock timers. And when you do this you have to be an expert on your list, to save time... and not lose.
So I would argue that Warmachine/hordes from PP is alot cheaper then 40k/WHFB, if you want it to be. Because making a highly competetive list do not require more miniatures, just the correct modells that you plan on using...

And how does that make a large 50$ figure cheaper than another large 50$ figure? How does it make a box of 5-6 infantry models for 50$ cheaper than another box of 5-6 infantry models for 50$?

Regardless of how much you spend overall, PP makes Premium priced individual models and units which are on par with GW prices in many situations. Only needing 3 models to play a game doesn't justify 100$ price tag per model when other companies can make a similar model for 10$. Per Model pricing is always a valid comparison, regardless if the game requires 200 models or 10 as a lot of customers only collect models and never play the games.

nkelsch wrote:


So if a game uses 3 models per side, each one can be 95$ because individual model prices can't be compared to models of similar size, material and sculpting?

PP has some models which are the same as their 40k counterparts, some more expensive, some less expensive. They have 40-50$ single models and 50-60$ boxes which is 'expensive' when compared to other manufacturers. PP is a 'premium' product which knowingly prices their models for what the market can bear... and they see people will pay these prices not just in GW's realm but in PP's realm too.

Smaller games doesn't make individual models cheaper... that is a delusional state people who own 7 armies and are addicted to models claim.

This is absolutely true, and as much as anti-GW and/or pro-PP people try to argue, PP is an equally expensive game, if not more so, when you consider how much you actually pay for a smaller amount of models. I was seriously considering starting WM about a year ago because a friend tried to get me into it, but as I looked into it, I was standing to drop around $200 on around 15 models. Sorry, but as high as GW's prices are, I can get anywhere from 1000-1500 points on a 40k army with $200 buying at an online retailer. All of which are much better sculpts and predominantly plastic. I don't want to drag this off-topic with a GW vs. PP argument, but when I was looking at it subjectively, wanting to start a WM faction, I found it to be a worse deal than a starter 40k army.

More on topic, I'd like to see GW go back to specialists games. I have so many friends, who are now all in our early 30's, more than willing to start a Necromunda campaign or Bloodbowl league, but starting a new 40k army is a much more daunting prospect. There simply isn't the time for some of them. GW could really captilaize on the casual gamer who wants something that can be set up and played in an hour and has a $50-$150 cost of entry.

They also need to create a Kill Team expansion(and WHFB equivalent) for the same reason. If they simply can't continue to be profitable without raising prices, create a game type with existing models and army books that can be played at a smaller level, and add some RPG elements(similar to Necromunda) to pull people into the expansive universe that is at the heart of their IP. I'd be much more likely to buy the shiny new box sets if I could play a skirmish level game and grabbing these sets wouldn't ultimately require several hundred dollars of investment over time. It's the ultimate catalyst for impluse buys on new sets. I seriously can't understand why they have capitalized on this. It literally would just require an expansion book, all the other elements are already available with no extra investment by them! The Kill Team rules they recently added for free are a nice first step, but flesh it out in a full expansion, and they would see a lot more of my money.

I actually don't care that PP is cheaper. I find the game incredibly boring. Every year I check to see if the game is still all about caster kill - and it is. I haven't seen Steamroller 2013 but I haven't heard anything different. The game is equally as unbalanced as 40k in my opinion when you don't see many units, casters, or even factions being used. The best players all devolve into taking the same best units. Whoop dee do.

The rules are tighter. Much tighter. However, I almost have no issues playing 40k at the tournament level. Generally, there are no disputes about rules, most of the disputes tend to revolve around TLOS.

Zoned wrote:
I actually don't care that PP is cheaper. I find the game incredibly boring. Every year I check to see if the game is still all about caster kill - and it is. I haven't seen Steamroller 2013 but I haven't heard anything different. The game is equally as unbalanced as 40k in my opinion when you don't see many units, casters, or even factions being used. The best players all devolve into taking the same best units. Whoop dee do.

Which is why major tournaments have seen the exact same casters win every slot. Oh wait.

1. Fix the pricing.

I've looked around. It is hard to find stuff at the same level of detail for significantly less. I.E. I wanted to convert a bunch of Bradley IFVs to Predators, but the IFV kits all seemed close to the cost of a predator. While the price hikes hurt, it has more to do with the global inflation then to specific policies. Material costs are going up everywhere.

2. Support organized play.

I miss the big once a year campaigns. it was lots of incentive to get to the gamestore and get some games in. However, GW usually did a poor job running them, especially Storm of Chaos.

I'd prefer if WD became the vector for such a campaign. With the rules and such released as part of an ongoing campaign in the book, and at the end of the year they released a online PDF people could download and use. There was just too much cheating going in in the online reporting, and the game managers always forgot certain armies (like the wood elves vs. tomb kings).


3. Create relevant and timely FAQ and errata. This is painfully needed.

Back with the release of third edition they updated every codex in the back of the book. With the large delay between books they really do need to work on updating every book after a new ruleset release. Not to release new units, but to at least address rules issues.

4. Bring back GW run forums.

GW forums were a wasteland. I don't miss them at all.

Really, my biggest concern with GW is the lack of gateway drugs. They need something kids can get hooked for 50-100 bucks. I would have some better small squad based stuff, using the same models as 40k or fantasy, that people can pick up and paint easily and get a good quick game in.

Space Hulk is a good example, but allow choices from more units. Keep the unit count low, around 10 models each, and give large amounts of customization.

Soon enough people will have two too three units and say, hey, if I add a tank and an HQ choice I've got a 40k army.

GW needs to bring in new blood, and has to compete with video games that are increasingly designed to be addictive. Hit the low price point as the hook, and then feed them new models in bite size chunks.

nkelsch wrote:

Smaller games doesn't make individual models cheaper... that is a delusional state people who own 7 armies and are addicted to models claim.

Of course not, but point 1 of the article isn't about the price of models per se, it's about the price of entry and how long it takes you to get to the cool stuff that you're really interested in:

There's chatter on all channels these days about how GW is pricing people out, yadda. And of course lower prices are a good idea. I'm not calling for an across-the-board slash. These days, it makes sense to pay $15 - $20 for a character model you're going to buy one of. I'd say that the prices for chumps isn't even that bad, model for model. Three to four bucks per dude is about right. I'm talking about the cool stuff, the marquee models that you really want to buy. No one is stoked to buy guardsmen.

They want mountains, Gandalf! And by mountains I mean Valkyries and Manticores and Lemans oh my!

And that's where people are starting to balk. It's a critical misfire in the engine of someone starting into the game or building a new army. It's just too much. I've got to stand there and explain to them in painful detail why they need like four of these boxes of chumps, and this dude and that dude, and then these Chimeras that are kinda cool 'cause they're tanks and all, but they're still just the Nissan Sentras of the army... and then they can start talking about the one with the giant missile racks, or the burly MBTs, or those bad-ass flyers.

So, by the time we get to the good stuff, they've already spent themselves far into trouble with the wife and on top of it all, they have to buy like three of all the cool models, too! It's not that Valkyries are expensive, in the scope of things; it's that you need multiples of them.

(...)

Problem is, when that premium price comes at the end of an already costly and drudgerous trek through just getting the basics of an army, it's a hell of a buzzkill. And when guys look down the road a bit, or are simply salted with the Hobby enough to know what they're getting into, it's a lot harder to cannonball in.

(emphasis mine)

Price per model is a fair discussion to have (I don't think anyone outside of the most rose-tintedly fanboy blinded would argue that a $135 Stormwall is not PP pushing the price as far as they think it will go), but how many models you get to put on the table per dollar spent is only one factor among many for people actually looking to get into wargames, and not always the most important one.

 Laughing Man wrote:
Which is why major tournaments have seen the exact same casters win every slot. Oh wait.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but 90% of the tournament postings on the link don't mention casters. And I do see quite a few repeats.

Zoned wrote:

 Laughing Man wrote:
Which is why major tournaments have seen the exact same casters win every slot. Oh wait.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but 90% of the tournament postings on the link don't mention casters. And I do see quite a few repeats.

Repeats of what? Every army has put something into a tourney win. The results are constantly mixed. What are widely regarded as the weakest factions, mercs and minions, even show up a fair amount. Have a hard time saying that about sisters of battle.

You're all completely missing the point.

There is only one step required:

- Stop trading as a public PLC company.

That's what it boils down to at the end of the day, GW as a corporation are legally obliged to maximise short-term sales growth for their shareholders.

Anything that is not 100% geared towards that end is not efficiently maximizing dividend yield for the shareholders and therefore represents a failure by the board of directors to do their job properly.

I didn't realize CBS news and the Institute for Economic research were loonie left wing conspiracy nuts.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505144_162-57387655/inflation-not-as-low-as-you-think/

If you don't feel like click it says inflation is about 8%. The government has changed the way they calculate inflation a number of times over the years. The current method includes big one time purchases like mortgages and cars which skew the average down. This study omits those and focuses on daily purchases which shows inflation is higher.

Another website http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts
does some calculations using the same methodology used in the 80's which gives us about 10%. I am not sure how loonie or left wing that site is though or how accurate their data is as I am not smart enough to double check their work.


TL;DR: the real inflation rate is about 8%-10% according to some experts. The government has changed the method they calculate this over the years to make the number look smaller.

Who would actually use GW forums? They would be full of look aid drinking noobs and a few people looking for a fight.

The old forums were the pits. The layout was horrible, you could post pictures of anything, which rather undermines a modelling/gaming discussion, and there were rules about what couldn't be talked about covering things from prices to 'squats'. Yes, they had a 'no squats' rule.

 scarletsquig wrote:
You're all completely missing the point.

There is only one step required:

- Stop trading as a public PLC company.

That's what it boils down to at the end of the day, GW as a corporation are legally obliged to maximise short-term sales growth for their shareholders.

Anything that is not 100% geared towards that end is not efficiently maximizing dividend yield for the shareholders and therefore represents a failure by the board of directors to do their job properly.

Yep I think this nails it.

I think every 'problem' with GW over the past 5 years or more has come down to the decision to go public - Finecast, the poor state of WD, the trade embargo, the perennial price increases, no new games (ex. Dreadfleet) and the burying of Specialist Games, and the general pervading but almost overwhelming sense of Myopia eminating from the company come down to this. None of these would have happened had the company remained a private concern. And I don't believe they would have gone bust either - more people would have been playing the damned games, and there would have been about 1000% less bitching about GW on the forums..

I think it's really interesting to hear an opinion on the pricing from someone who actually has to try and sell the stuff. This paragraph really stood out to me:

I take the young man over to my GW section, resplendent with (largely unsold, sadly) new Hobbit stuff and he's in heaven. I do a bit of a spiel to mom about the Hobby and blah blah, then let them know I'm available for questions and leave them to their shopping. I head back to the counter just in time to see mom flip the Hobbit starter box and take a sh*t at the price tag. As I'm walking away, I overhear the dreaded mom kiss of death: “I don't know, honey...

This sounds very familiar. You do have to wonder how many potential sales are lost each day in this manner.

nkelsch wrote:
Smaller games doesn't make individual models cheaper... that is a delusional state people who own 7 armies and are addicted to models claim.

I think this was addressed in the article the OP linked. He was speaking from the point of view of a sales person, and the advantage of smaller games like Warmachine is you can say "Yeah these 5 guys are expensive, but once you get them you're gonna kick ass". That's a lot more encouraging than "Yeah these 5 guys are expensive, but once you get them you're gonna need 6 more boxes". It doesn't change the price per model, but it does change people's enthusiasm towards spending, and general satisfaction with the purchase.

 Smacks wrote:
I think it's really interesting to hear an opinion on the pricing from someone who actually has to try and sell the stuff. This paragraph really stood out to me:

I take the young man over to my GW section, resplendent with (largely unsold, sadly) new Hobbit stuff and he's in heaven. I do a bit of a spiel to mom about the Hobby and blah blah, then let them know I'm available for questions and leave them to their shopping. I head back to the counter just in time to see mom flip the Hobbit starter box and take a sh*t at the price tag. As I'm walking away, I overhear the dreaded mom kiss of death: “I don't know, honey...

This sounds very familiar. You do have to wonder how many potential sales are lost each day in this manner.

I honestly don't think people understand the concept of lowering the price and selling more and instead just assume that people will spend the same amount of money and just buy less models or worse yet assume people will buy the same amount of models, as if people have nothing else in the world to spend money on. Sure, some people will still spend the same amount of money and buy the same number of models, but it's a fallacy to think you aren't also going to lose customers and struggle to bring new customers in if you keep raising prices.

There's obviously an optimal pricing for getting maximum profit, personally I think GW have blown through that.

It's been true to a point though, GW veterans have historically paid pretty much anything for GW stuff, either from shelves, special releases or FW things. You can see this by OOP/limited edition stuff selling on ebay for multiples of the original RRP.

However, the same doesn't translate to new customers. With no prior investment or idea of how things are valued, they are comparing it with other stuff they know about; computer games, board games, and toys. The people who see the starter sets as too expensive as those that GW are trying to bring in. The people who will snap up the starter sets are the people GW doesn't actually care about.

I'm curious as to what the ratio of beginner to vet is with the starter set sales. I'd assume most vets will buy at least one of most of the starter sets for the games they play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 scarletsquig wrote:
You're all completely missing the point.

There is only one step required:

- Stop trading as a public PLC company.

That's what it boils down to at the end of the day, GW as a corporation are legally obliged to maximise short-term sales growth for their shareholders.

Anything that is not 100% geared towards that end is not efficiently maximizing dividend yield for the shareholders and therefore represents a failure by the board of directors to do their job properly.

They aren't legally obliged to maximise short-term sales growth purely because they have shareholders, especially if most of the share holders are long term investment groups. There are plenty of companies who focus on long term growth and don't try to maximize dividend yield (Apple rarely pays a dividend).

Short term growth is just the easiest thing to achieve and has the biggest incentive for management paid in stock or based on profit.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Who would actually use GW forums? They would be full of look aid drinking noobs and a few people looking for a fight.

The old forums were the pits. The layout was horrible, you could post pictures of anything, which rather undermines a modelling/gaming discussion, and there were rules about what couldn't be talked about covering things from prices to 'squats'. Yes, they had a 'no squats' rule.

They might have people who actually play games - unlike some forums I could mention.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MisterMoon wrote:

1. Indeed, but the official inflation rate is fudged.

The rate of inflation being at 3% is independently researched and peer-reviewed, and is relied on by all industries (including GW). So contrary to what you hear on AM radio, it's academically proven to be at 3%. No one but gold peddling far right loonies are saying that the inflation rate is at 10%.

2. I'm not sure where you get the idea that GW does not organize tournaments.

Their support for tournaments is a shadow of it's former self. I'm not sure if you're paying attention.

3. Perhaps you should re-evaluate your hobby.

Because I want timely updates, and not have to wait forever? How about I evaluate that company's competition, which I did, and non-GW companies are getting more of my gaming dollar than ever before.

4. GW has plenty of avenues to communicate with it's customers, all of them my useful than the possible feedback they would receive through an 'official forum'. And why would they bother with the hassle, and potential loss of sales, when they can get all the information they need by reading the numerous forums that already exist?

What about the avenue for me to communicate with them in a matter of my choosing since I am the customer? My thoughts are echoed through out the gaming community. Instead of allowing proper two way communication, they'd rather just snoop in on other forums and read it? That's poor communication imo. PP, and others have realized that we are, indeed, in the 21st century, and have used internet forums as a means to provide modern communication. If done right a forum would only perfect the product, as other gaming companies (all of them in fact) have found out. The link provided by the OP, if you even read it, provides good explanation on it's benefit.

1. I see why you need FAQ's given you inability to argue a point without getting angry.

2. Warhammer World runs plenty of events, tournaments and campaigns.

3. And will you obsess for a year over a game of soldiers in these other games?

4. Have you tried email? Or writing a letter? Or writing a White Dwarf article?

TBO, I've enjoyed GW products in the past, but if the company went under, I wouldn't be bothered that much.

As it has been pointed out by many a person on this site, there are so many other companies/minis out there, that I'm sure the hobby will survive even if GW run themselves into the ground.