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.

Yep, as opposed to actually continuing to develop product lines - they tend to use anything other than Space Marines as a splash in the pan to get them from point A to point B.

The potential for sales though of something like CoD though is something that they miss out on when they don't attempt to capitalize on the sales. Apocalypse was probably the biggest missed opportunity for them, as I recall at the time that there was much clamoring from the non-Imperial players regarding the possibilities of what might come out in support of their chosen armies. Alas, no love for them - something that actually managed to drive some away as a result.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Back to Sean_OBrien, I agree with you essentially. GW haven't supported CoD or PlanetStrike and probably won't support Fliers (which doesn't fit into 40K anyway except as a means for selling each faction one or two expensive models.) Apocalypse and Planetary Empires might well be added to the list while we are on the topic.

Ditto Storm of Magic in Fantasy.

The data on the number of employees from the first post is interesting. I do wonder if some of the numbers reflect increased efficiency in production. As was pointed out, there is less spin casting today than in 2001. Further there is more plastic production. This could lead to some workers becoming redundant. I also wonder if some of the changes in sales staff versus administration are not a matter of the changing nature of business. Back in 2001 I imagine that GW was not particularly reliant on computers. They needed people to man the phone, or sell products in stores. Today, a fair amount of business is done over the net. They now need IT people and other administrators to make the company run rather than people on the phone.

All of this being said, I tend to agree with the OP's sentiment that GW went wrong when they stopped building the community.

GW strikes me as a company that pays for hosting rather than paying internal IT folks.
Even their internal sales software is probably web-driven, meaning they just have to support what - 5-600 desktops (not every full timer needs one or will interact with one on a daily basis). Even doubling that, it shouldn't take more than 10 people to manage them. (assuming they handle everything internally without things like SCCM or whatever Microsoft calls it nowadays).

A team of 5 managed ~4000 desktops at my last job.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

silent25 wrote:
Only issue I have with your numbers is you are basing them off the peak of the LOTR bubble. What were the 1999-2000 numbers and 2004-2005 numbers? You are showing revenues that were boosted by factors outside of Kirby's control for the most part.

2002 would have been the first FY report with any LotR impact (the movies came out in late 2001 which would have been after that years report was issued). Peak for the LotR was 2004 with just over 151 million pounds. Growth from 1996 to 2001 was an average of 15% per year. Growth during the LotR period (2002, 2003 and 2004) was 18% per year. Growth since they bottomed out in 2008 has been about 2% per year (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012).

Would you rather a different set of numbers be used instead?

No, the charts you posted speak more than enough to illustrate the points clearly. One thing that I think also caused the drop in sale, the end of the global events. 2004 was the Storm of Chaos and the last time GW had an event where they tried to create a feeling that the community could impact the game. There were huge events at my local game store and the owner told me how families would come in during these events, see all the people playing and immediately buy $400~500US of GW goods for their kids. People were excited, crazy ideas were coming out of the studio, and things were going good. The end of the SoC I think really marked the beginning of the decline. The studio did not like the outcome (Chaos got it's rear kicked) and Gav Thorpe spat out an end story that left no one happy. That was the last "grand campaign" that GW put on. There have been a couple more attempts, but none on that scale.

In interviews with Thorpe and Cavatore, they also mentioned there was a clamp down on the studio design shortly after that and the end of things like Chapter Approved and other experimental rules in WD. Thorpe had described the period leading up that as the studio dictated the releases.

 spaceelf wrote:
The data on the number of employees from the first post is interesting. I do wonder if some of the numbers reflect increased efficiency in production. As was pointed out, there is less spin casting today than in 2001. Further there is more plastic production. This could lead to some workers becoming redundant. I also wonder if some of the changes in sales staff versus administration are not a matter of the changing nature of business. Back in 2001 I imagine that GW was not particularly reliant on computers. They needed people to man the phone, or sell products in stores. Today, a fair amount of business is done over the net. They now need IT people and other administrators to make the company run rather than people on the phone.

All of this being said, I tend to agree with the OP's sentiment that GW went wrong when they stopped building the community.

The big changes in sales was slashing retail staff. They transitioned from regular stores with two or three employees to the one man store in many locations. Roughly half of all GW locations are now one man stores, and they intend to transition many of the remainder to that format. This allows them to eliminate the part time staff from retail (which is where you see the big drop).

In terms of essential administrators - I don't think the operations will have changed too much between 2001/2002 and now. Computers were already in place and GW was already doing a lot of business online. Anyone who is fielding orders through email or the web store are also categorized as "Selling and Distribution" so the administrators are the remainder of the company who generally get in the way of getting things done.

Considering that the drop in production/design is somewhat insignificant between the two periods (324 in 2002 compared to 286 in 2012) - that is likely based largely on things like efficiencies of plastic production and elimination of the bits service. The growth in administrators though is the problem for a company like GW. They have no contact with the game, they have no contact with the customers. I would not be surprised if half of them have never even collected miniatures themselves. The disconnect that you often see between managerial types and the products which they sell is not generally a problem if their product is paper clips or flat screen TVs. However, it becomes problematic when you have a greater degree of synergy between the products that you are selling and a growing community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
GW strikes me as a company that pays for hosting rather than paying internal IT folks.
Even their internal sales software is probably web-driven, meaning they just have to support what - 5-600 desktops (not every full timer needs one or will interact with one on a daily basis). Even doubling that, it shouldn't take more than 10 people to manage them. (assuming they handle everything internally without things like SCCM or whatever Microsoft calls it nowadays).

A team of 5 managed ~4000 desktops at my last job.

They contract things out:

http://www.tentonmarketing.com/Portfolio/ATG-games-workshop_CS.pdf

That is a case study from the company that they hired out to do the last redesign of their website.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

silent25 wrote:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

silent25 wrote:
Only issue I have with your numbers is you are basing them off the peak of the LOTR bubble. What were the 1999-2000 numbers and 2004-2005 numbers? You are showing revenues that were boosted by factors outside of Kirby's control for the most part.

2002 would have been the first FY report with any LotR impact (the movies came out in late 2001 which would have been after that years report was issued). Peak for the LotR was 2004 with just over 151 million pounds. Growth from 1996 to 2001 was an average of 15% per year. Growth during the LotR period (2002, 2003 and 2004) was 18% per year. Growth since they bottomed out in 2008 has been about 2% per year (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012).

Would you rather a different set of numbers be used instead?

No, the charts you posted speak more than enough to illustrate the points clearly. One thing that I think also caused the drop in sale, the end of the global events. 2004 was the Storm of Chaos and the last time GW had an event where they tried to create a feeling that the community could impact the game. There were huge events at my local game store and the owner told me how families would come in during these events, see all the people playing and immediately buy $400~500US of GW goods for their kids. People were excited, crazy ideas were coming out of the studio, and things were going good. The end of the SoC I think really marked the beginning of the decline. The studio did not like the outcome (Chaos got it's rear kicked) and Gav Thorpe spat out an end story that left no one happy. That was the last "grand campaign" that GW put on. There have been a couple more attempts, but none on that scale.

In interviews with Thorpe and Cavatore, they also mentioned there was a clamp down on the studio design shortly after that and the end of things like Chapter Approved and other experimental rules in WD. Thorpe had described the period leading up that as the studio dictated the releases.

Yep, that is exactly the change that I was talking about.

When GW shifted away from driving sales by growing the community to attempting to drive profits by hiking prices and slashing costs - everything went sideways. Whether it was dropping specialist games, discontinuing bits services, gutting White Dwarf, no longer running grand tournaments (or even not so grand tournaments)... They all added up to the same result - a withering community and lack of enthusiasm.

On paper, when you are looking at places to streamline business - it might look good to drop something like a Global Event, after all - you don't sell anything that is specifically called a global event. However, the impact that it has by driving sales of current products is significant, not to mention that it creates buzz around the products.

Really interesting thread, very insightful. Keep up the great posts Sean!

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW's metagame is to cycle armies in and out of popularity to stimulate purchase of more than one force.

SMs are the exception. They are always kept popular by the variety of codexes available for variants. This is to maintain their appeal to new users.

The business would stagnate without this strategy, as GW aren't interested in making other games.

Which leads to the question again...what is going to happen when they run out of armies to update in this new fast paced period of releases?

They may not be able to sustain the current pace of codex releases. There are still quite a few to be updated for both editions so if they slow down even to bimonthly they can still cover the period until the core rules are revised. There are already rumors that the O&G armybook will be revised in fantasy before all the fantasy books are updated for 8th edition.

In any event once they update all the books then in all likelihood they will simply start the cycle over again. People have been clamoring for decades for faster turnover of army books after all. I think we are all just surprised at the hardbacks and $50 price tag that came along with the granting of our wish.

How many 40K armies lack a 6th edition codex? I haven't kept careful track of it.

I don't think people want a fast turnover of new books. They just want their army to be up to date and competitive so they can play on a level playing field.

The reason I don't mention Fantasy is because I don't play it any more and have very little knowledge.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
How many 40K armies lack a 6th edition codex? I haven't kept careful track of it.

All of them except Chaos Marines, Demons, Dark Angels and Tau (in a couple of weeks)

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I don't think people want a fast turnover of new books. They just want their army to be up to date and competitive so they can play on a level playing field.

Well the way that you get your army updated is with a new codex. Just ask all those players that bought flamers after the WD update if you dont believe me.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The reason I don't mention Fantasy is because I don't play it any more and have very little knowledge.

Probably get through about half the whfb army books for 8th by the end of this year.

 -Loki- wrote:

You use an army dropped 20 years ago for your proof GW makes armies obsolete?

GW has (historically, at least) always made a big thing about avoiding obsoletion; every figure GW produces was valid in stores and tournaments even if replaced with a modern version. Essentially: "Buy this figure and be able to use it forever! How good a deal is that?"

So some people taking them at their word are a bit annoyed that they've invested into an army that they thought would get ongoing support to find it dropped. It also means the same may happen to any existing collections; they may get dropped / nerfed in their entirity, or it may just happen to units. So the only guarantee that the figures you buy can still be used is until the next codex / edition change. And when it seems that codex/rule changes are doing this intentionally to drive model sales (tanks good in one edition, infantry in the next, fliers in the next, etc), it just makes things more confrontational and frustrating for the vets who are heavily invested.

Whilst playing with a 20 year old army isn't the norm, it used to be perfectly acceptable, and regarded as pretty cool.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
On paper, when you are looking at places to streamline business - it might look good to drop something like a Global Event, after all - you don't sell anything that is specifically called a global event. However, the impact that it has by driving sales of current products is significant, not to mention that it creates buzz around the products.

But once you're already set on slashing retail head-count you strictly limit yourself in what you do. Even if they wanted to run a new global campaign, the one man stores wouldn't be able to take part without additional hiring, because they just aren't able to deal with any significant volume of gamers / customers.

I don't know about always. I've heard that in the past GW stores did require you to replace older models with new ones when they were released, but that the policy didn't last very long. May be wrong about that though, hearsay and all.

Never heard of a store doing that. Closest was a guy being told to leave because he wasn't using GW minis*.



*He was using Squats. The manager was an idiot.

Herzlos wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
On paper, when you are looking at places to streamline business - it might look good to drop something like a Global Event, after all - you don't sell anything that is specifically called a global event. However, the impact that it has by driving sales of current products is significant, not to mention that it creates buzz around the products.

But once you're already set on slashing retail head-count you strictly limit yourself in what you do. Even if they wanted to run a new global campaign, the one man stores wouldn't be able to take part without additional hiring, because they just aren't able to deal with any significant volume of gamers / customers.

I agree, though I dont agree with them cutting their stores to one man shops. If they are going to have a retail arm, they should have a retail arm that is properly staffed to run a game store. If they cant do that without loosing money (which they seem to be incapable of doing) then close the store...dont hobble it.

With those unprofitable stores out of the way, they could revive the Outrider program and actually work to support LGS by coordinating the global events both in them and in their large bunker stores (of which they really only need a dozen or two world wide).

But...again, that goes against the MBA theory. I dropped into one of their stores a few months ago and it felt more like a cell phone store than a game store.

Lanrak wrote:
Just the short sighted focus on maximizing short term profit , with such a detrimental effect on long term viability of GW.

This is a problem throughout the business community, and not just for GW. Do you really think a small percentage of people can take vast sums of money OUT of the economy decade after decade and NOT starve the economy of liquidity?

Everything business related I hear about GW cries out for me "wargamers that decided they are businessmen". So much incompetence and stupidity like it comes up in connection with that CHS lawsuit, someone there is completely out of his mind and lost reality grasp. No really, how can anybody claim rights to works of art he never secured, then send letters to the artists trying to convince them they have lost the notices, but rights were submitted all right, so pleas sign this form and don't bother the small printed lines...? Only people of the psychological classification "narcistic" would believe to come through with such stunts. Or people who are under influence of cocaine. Or both. This one anecdote tells so much...

Former Porsche head honcho Wendelin Wiedekind, before he choked on too big a chunk, while Porsche still was a paragon of a well led business, once said something about managers not understanding that the important thing about a healthy business is not the dividend, but the operative gain. Someone in GW did not understand that, or he understands all too well.

1. It is Kirby himself who botches it. Would not be the first businessman who thinks of himself as the smart one while in reality having no grasp on simple facts of life. That would mean the sharks should follow the CHS suit with interest, for there is one ripe and easy prey in the pond (not the wargaming industry, but the finance business). Bye bye GW, you are dead.

2. Kirby IS already the shark who recogniced he could outsmart those gamers in order to milk the cow to death. In this case he is indeed cleverer than his surroundings, but has no interest in the company's long-term wellfare, just in getting as much money out of it as he can. Bye bye GW, you are dead.

 Hruotland wrote:

2. Kirby IS already the shark who recogniced he could outsmart those gamers in order to milk the cow to death. In this case he is indeed cleverer than his surroundings, but has no interest in the company's long-term wellfare, just in getting as much money out of it as he can. Bye bye GW, you are dead.

That seems to be the accepted theory among the 'not blatant haters but defiantly disillusioned with GW' camp.

On the updating of books, part of the problem ends up not being how often books get updated, but how often certain things got passed over for updates. If they would choose a pattern and update things in sequence - players would know that there time would come. With the scatter brained cycle, things get updated at random...players become dissillusioned and armies get left behind.

The other issue which is somewhat unique to 40K is how badly GW attempts to milk Marines for sales. They are now up to what, 6 Marine Codices? Of those, only 2 or 3 are really distinct in practical ways. The rest are distinguished by fluff and stuff, something which could be done through articles like the old Index Astartes in WD.

The graphic with inflation added does really show a clearer state of things regarding sales numbers... ouch!

SInce I'm unbiased towards the company I also think I should say that in the recession age we are in, for so many years in a row, the small profit ( even if padded with the cut offs etc) is nothing to sniff at.

As for the obsolete debate I believe some where expressing personal views about their own armies while others are talking in a wider sense... I mean If I run a spam list of a unit that has become crap well my list is obsolete and as such all of my spam army.... but on the general sense of things my army Nids is not obsolete. What everyone needs to understand is that GW philosophy towards is quite simple... 40k is not a competitive game, not aimed for tournaments circles but rather an excuse to sell GW minis.

 Flashman wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Back to Sean_OBrien, I agree with you essentially. GW haven't supported CoD or PlanetStrike and probably won't support Fliers (which doesn't fit into 40K anyway except as a means for selling each faction one or two expensive models.) Apocalypse and Planetary Empires might well be added to the list while we are on the topic.

Ditto Storm of Magic in Fantasy.

Rightfully so. Storm of Magic was complete trash, destroying any balance of a normal WHFB game and making the outcome of each game completely random.

 NAVARRO wrote:
What everyone needs to understand is that GW philosophy towards is quite simple... 40k is not a competitive game, not aimed for tournaments circles but rather an excuse to sell GW minis.

...this year.

40K's popularity was built on their Grand Tournaments. Throughout most of the 1990s all the way till the dramatic drop off on the charts. When GW started to stop trying to balance the game, and the most recent edition where they have completely given up on the concept...tournaments drove a lot of interest.

That is one of the reasons you saw an explosion for Magic the Gathering when it came onto the scene, and it is one of the big reasons for the growth in PP games. People like the idea of competing against each other. Even people who do not play in tournaments directly are impacted as tournament players tend to show up more often at game nights - and that helps to increase the availability of the products towards that critical mass point where the customers can actually take over the job of advertising the product.

I say this year though, as I have a hard time believing that no one at GW HQ can not see the correlation between the two issues. The next edition of the game may be wrapped up specifically with tournament play in mind.

SInce I'm unbiased towards the company I also think I should say that in the recession age we are in, for so many years in a row, the small profit ( even if padded with the cut offs etc) is nothing to sniff at.

It also isn't anything to champion. The long economic rough patch has created an odd situation for most companies. A large majority of them are actually doing quite well on paper. Hasbro for example has seen almost 12% gain on revenue and a 15% gain on income (effectively profits after expenses). Although they are not the same type of company as GW - they do deal in the same category of goods as GW.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
What everyone needs to understand is that GW philosophy towards is quite simple... 40k is not a competitive game, not aimed for tournaments circles but rather an excuse to sell GW minis.

...this year.

40K's popularity was built on their Grand Tournaments. Throughout most of the 1990s all the way till the dramatic drop off on the charts. When GW started to stop trying to balance the game, and the most recent edition where they have completely given up on the concept...tournaments drove a lot of interest.

That is one of the reasons you saw an explosion for Magic the Gathering when it came onto the scene, and it is one of the big reasons for the growth in PP games. People like the idea of competing against each other. Even people who do not play in tournaments directly are impacted as tournament players tend to show up more often at game nights - and that helps to increase the availability of the products towards that critical mass point where the customers can actually take over the job of advertising the product.

I say this year though, as I have a hard time believing that no one at GW HQ can not see the correlation between the two issues. The next edition of the game may be wrapped up specifically with tournament play in mind.

If I was to express my personal view on this I would agree with you, tournaments are essential for 40K /fantasy and without them there is a huge ( if not the biggest) demographic of GW clients that are not catered.
I also believe if there is a game attached to the minis it should be built to the best competitive standards, as it is ( rejecting the competitive nature of the gaming) 40k falls short of what it could be.
The universe and the minis are good it is a shame that they take the investment shortcut of not balancing the game.

On codex updates. If GW were less concerned with selling overpriced books in the short-term; they would produce more, meatier Errata and FAQs to ensure that each army is competitive when they update the overall rules. They went this direction a bit with 6th but it for the most part it wasn't comprehensive enough to bring all armies onto a level playing field. They could really learn something from PP in this regard which is why I'm seriously considering making the jump over to their system and just play 40K/WHFB when the mood strikes me or when I feel the need to be reminded that there is no internal balance to the game...at all.

 agnosto wrote:
On codex updates. If GW were less concerned with selling overpriced books in the short-term; they would produce more, meatier Errata and FAQs to ensure that each army is competitive when they update the overall rules. They went this direction a bit with 6th but it for the most part it wasn't comprehensive enough to bring all armies onto a level playing field. They could really learn something from PP in this regard which is why I'm seriously considering making the jump over to their system and just play 40K/WHFB when the mood strikes me or when I feel the need to be reminded that there is no internal balance to the game...at all.

Since you mention PP, it would be soooooo interesting to see the charts regarding their sales... the only problem we do see populating threads a bit everywhere is the issues that they have maintaining stock levels to a degree that satisfies demand. We can speculate that this is a sign of outstanding sales numbers but it could be so many other reasons.

One thing of notice PP will be at salute with a speed painting comp... GW should d the same, creating awareness keeping people entertained is what a company in entertainment should aim for. And yes Sean_OBrien its nothing of champion the sales numbers but nevertheless it's above the water line.

Speaking of volumes lets see how the Kickstarters hoover also drained GW sales ( small companies are already complaining about it).

 NAVARRO wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
On codex updates. If GW were less concerned with selling overpriced books in the short-term; they would produce more, meatier Errata and FAQs to ensure that each army is competitive when they update the overall rules. They went this direction a bit with 6th but it for the most part it wasn't comprehensive enough to bring all armies onto a level playing field. They could really learn something from PP in this regard which is why I'm seriously considering making the jump over to their system and just play 40K/WHFB when the mood strikes me or when I feel the need to be reminded that there is no internal balance to the game...at all.

Since you mention PP, it would be soooooo interesting to see the charts regarding their sales... the only problem we do see populating threads a bit everywhere is the issues that they have maintaining stock levels to a degree that satisfies demand. We can speculate that this is a sign of outstanding sales numbers but it could be so many other reasons.

One thing of notice PP will be at salute with a speed painting comp... GW should d the same, creating awareness keeping people entertained is what a company in entertainment should aim for. And yes Sean_OBrien its nothing of champion the sales numbers but nevertheless it's above the water line.

Speaking of volumes lets see how the Kickstarters hoover also drained GW sales ( small companies are already complaining about it).

You bring up a good point; since PP is not publicly traded, it's nearly impossible to tell how much of those lost GW sales have gone their way. I was primarily thinking that their way of updating their product is more attractive to me than the GW method of "Let it sit on the shelf until we get around to it."

If GW would do something similar to packing unit rules with the boxes themselves, they would be in the situation where people are forced to download scanned images off of the internet if they want to play SoB or forced to have an iOS device to pay the exorbitant sums they charge for the Ork fliers and other items that came from WD.

 NAVARRO wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
On codex updates. If GW were less concerned with selling overpriced books in the short-term; they would produce more, meatier Errata and FAQs to ensure that each army is competitive when they update the overall rules. They went this direction a bit with 6th but it for the most part it wasn't comprehensive enough to bring all armies onto a level playing field. They could really learn something from PP in this regard which is why I'm seriously considering making the jump over to their system and just play 40K/WHFB when the mood strikes me or when I feel the need to be reminded that there is no internal balance to the game...at all.

Since you mention PP, it would be soooooo interesting to see the charts regarding their sales... the only problem we do see populating threads a bit everywhere is the issues that they have maintaining stock levels to a degree that satisfies demand. We can speculate that this is a sign of outstanding sales numbers but it could be so many other reasons.

One thing of notice PP will be at salute with a speed painting comp... GW should d the same, creating awareness keeping people entertained is what a company in entertainment should aim for. And yes Sean_OBrien its nothing of champion the sales numbers but nevertheless it's above the water line.

Speaking of volumes lets see how the Kickstarters hoover also drained GW sales ( small companies are already complaining about it).

Yes, one of the downsides of a private company is that they do tend to keep those things private and that makes it hard to make a real comparison with GW as they are the only publicly traded wargame company that I can think of.

5 years ago or so, I had heard from a friend who worked with PP that they were doing $15 million in sales. They seemed to be stuck there for a good bit though, but with their increased production capacity - I wouldn't be too surprised if they had doubled or tripled that number by now.

Not too sure about the impact KS will have on small companies - though I can imagine a chunk has been taken out of GWs sales. Small companies tend to be patronized by people who shop small companies for what ever reason. While they tend to make nice products, I have noticed that most small companies...especially small miniature companies always have something that they are certain is holding them back. Sort of their quirky nature like the Soup Nazi.

An ex-PP employee told me their total 2010 sales were about a quarter of GW's North American sales at that time. That would put it close to the $15 million Sean_OBrien is stating. While they have likely seen strong growth, it is safe to assume that it is not higher than GW at it's peak growth rates (15-18%). That would put them around $25 million in sales right now at best. As for increase in production, it doesn't sound like it happened. The ex-employee told me they had only three people in the casting department. They also fired the two more experienced ones and brought in two new people to replace them and have the third person train them. That fell apart when he quit and they had to scramble to meet demand.

Just to go back to one point Sean_OBrien and I are agreeing on.GW stopped the tournament and campaigns in the mid-00's and that is when GW's sales started to drop and have stayed relatively flat since. I feel LotR contributed a lot to the drop, but the lack of table presence in stores is contributing to their failed recovery.

The cutting of the global events and tournaments looked great on paper, but they failed to comprehend intangible benefits. A beer and pretzel game game can be fun to play at home, but it doesn't help spread the game when no one can see it.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The business would stagnate without this strategy, as GW aren't interested in making other games.

Hold on... would stagnate? Future tense?

In a different thread the issue of the ICv2 numbers came up (can't seem to find which one it was in though now for some reason) and someone had asked what the numbers were and how they might reflect the broader picture. Needed to wait till I got home to a proper computer where I could hammer such things out...but here goes the bits which I know to be certain.

The ICv2 survey is a survey of US game stores, comic book stores and other hobby related retailers. It deals only with the independent retailers - so GW's own sales figures do not reflect sales made directly from GW (online) or through GW stores. The number reflects dollars sold, not units. As I understand it it is fully impartial and well regarded among retailers in terms of accuracy and reflecting the situation on the ground.

We also know that GW does approximately 45% of its business in North America through independent stores (in terms of GW's sales in pounds. Roughly 45% is through GW stores and the remaining 10% is through direct sales. The reason why it is important to note that it is in GW's sales to retailers is done at a wholesale discount (which we will call 40% for sake of simplicity even though some are a bit better than that as I understand it). So, for every 5 items that are sold through an independent retailer...the GW store is selling 3 in order to add the same dollar (or pound) amount to the sales figures.

In North America, 40K outsells fantasy by roughly 3 to 1 in dollars.

In North America, 40K accounts for roughly half of all GW sales.

I am extremely confident in the veracity of that information. I came to it through people who worked for or with GW over the years, and recent revelations through the CHS case tend to confirm the general numbers. Other portions have been mentioned in either financial reports or the rare statement GW gives to a media source.

So...on back around to the ICv2 Survey:

1) Warhammer 40k - Games Workshop - $19.4 million
2) Warmachine - Privateer Press -
3) Warhammer Fantasy - Games Workshop - $6.4 million
4) Hordes - Privateer Press -
5) Malifaux - Wyrd Miniatures -

While the actual figures for the two PP games are still unknown, the figure that I had heard and the figure which Silent had heard are in agreement and would put them sort of in that sweet spot.

The position held by WFB seems to be on the lower side of the spectrum, as it has shown up as low as number 5 on the list on more than one occasion:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/14724.html

Hordes and Warmachine actually were quite close to the same sales figures in the 3-5 years ago period as the two games flip flopped back and forth from quarterly survey to the next.

Wyrd looks to be comfortable in 5th - though other companies have bumped it off a few times in the not so distant past:

http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/18505.html

So, taking all that in mind and using somewhat conservative numbers to project things based on the ICv2 figures, known numbers from GW, data from the CHS case, we can reasonably speculate that the PP games would fall somewhere like so:

1) Warhammer 40k - Games Workshop - $19.4 million
2) Warmachine - Privateer Press - $18.6 million
3) Warhammer Fantasy - Games Workshop - $6.4 million
4) Hordes - Privateer Press - $4.5 million
5) Malifaux - Wyrd Miniatures -

Malifaux is a bit harder to pin down though as it has fallen off the chart some a few times as I mentioned above. I would guess though that they are really close to the Hordes figure.

As with everything else, this information is really only reflective to the US market - though my experience in Canada would indicate that the numbers generally apply up there as well. Europe, the UK especially will probably have completely different observations - especially in light of the fact that PP hasn't localized their rules at all...so it is English or nothing.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

So, taking all that in mind and using somewhat conservative numbers to project things based on the ICv2 figures, known numbers from GW, data from the CHS case, we can reasonably speculate that the PP games would fall somewhere like so:

1) Warhammer 40k - Games Workshop - $19.4 million
2) Warmachine - Privateer Press - $18.6 million
3) Warhammer Fantasy - Games Workshop - $6.4 million
4) Hordes - Privateer Press - $4.5 million
5) Malifaux - Wyrd Miniatures -

Malifaux is a bit harder to pin down though as it has fallen off the chart some a few times as I mentioned above. I would guess though that they are really close to the Hordes figure.

As with everything else, this information is really only reflective to the US market - though my experience in Canada would indicate that the numbers generally apply up there as well. Europe, the UK especially will probably have completely different observations - especially in light of the fact that PP hasn't localized their rules at all...so it is English or nothing.

Think that figure is a bit deceptive because you are showing PP's possible global sales when compared to GW's US sales. UK and Canada would likely be a decent fraction. There is a potential swing of $13 million in those numbers. But that could be made up for in international sales. Surprised that Hordes has so much smaller a following. Is there any basis to that breakdown?

Also, Fantasy has been #3 on ICv2's charts consistently since Third Quarter 2009. So I don't think you can say it fluctuates. Though it is interesting because the sales position seem to go against the prevailing internet logic that WHFB is a dying game. It's position went up to 3rd from 5th over half a year in 2009 and has stayed there since. It seems 8th helped the game more than hurt it. If 8th was as big a disaster as people claim, it would have dropped back down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also just want to add, one other thing that helped GW's growth that PP currently does not have, easy access to capital. GW went public in 1994 and was able to leverage the influx of capital. PP is still dependent on banks for additional capital. Given the credit crisis of the last several years, I doubt getting cash was easy if any.

I'm not sure they have been able to take advantage of the game's increased popularity and increase production that much.