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.

From BOLS:

The largest three institutional investors (Nomad, Investec, Phoenix) begin selling off their GW portfolios within 1 week of the announcement of CEO Mark Wells leaving the company.

FIL and in particular Ruffer begin to purchase GW equity at a large rate. Ruffer bought a large set of shares as recently as March 21, 2013, bringing them above the 8% ownership mark.

Games Workshop equity has been fairly locked up and unchanged for a long time prior to 2013.

Thoughts and ideas?

Company about to skyrocket?
Company about to crater?
Company about to get bought?
Business as usual?

http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?30816-Games-Workshop-Ownership-Changes

It looks like one investment firm has sold off shares, only for another investment firm to buy them up.

At 1st glance doesn't seem it's going to have any impact on us consumers.

It figures that the Tau would finally get an update as GW goes out of business .

In all seriousness though, I highly doubt it's the end. I know GWs been struggling to stay afloat and I blame their poor decisions to estrange existing fans with shallow fluff and codecies and estranging potential new interest by hiking prices up ridiculously. Even if this is just a sign of business as usual, GW is doing a poor job at making money and taking it out on their store managers when they can't meet quota by selling over priced miniatures.

While I love their games, GW as a business makes me a bit angry.

I could have sworn we've already had this conversation, somewhat recently?

I've been told GW is in talks to sell off the company. A lot of people have been discussing the possibilities, and I've been sitting on this info for a little while. In case it had been leaked to only my source, I didn't want to chance getting them in trouble, but with so many people discussing it, it's probably safe to discuss now. But I do have sources saying GW is looking to sell off. Pretre, feel free to add me as a 'monger on this-I don't have a timeframe for you, but I'd imagine the next year or two. I'm confident enough in my source to put my name on your thread.

Same conversation, different dude. I think people keep wishing Kirby would go away so they've oft entertained the notion.

It somewhat tallies with observations that others have made elsewhere on Dakka, to wit, that GW's recent corporate behaviour draws some striking comparisons with TSR prior to their takeover; that the recent business decisions being made at GW are indicative of a company positioning itself to make itself more appealing for a takeover bid.

The Nomad Investment Partnership LP 16.2% (- 645,859 shares, January 18.7%)
Investec Asset Management Ltd 9.7% (- 2,612,235 shares, January 18.3%)
Ruffer LLP 8.1% (+ 1,757,260 shares, January 2.5%)
Tom Kirby 6.7% (same)
Phoenix Asset Management Partners Ltd. 5.9% (- 1,034,782 shares, January 9.3%)
FIL Limited 5.5% (+ 953,900 shares, January 2.5%)

(Sold 4,292,876 , bought 2,711,160)

Ownership changes can be relevant, if someone knows the investors.
Ruffer LLP (bought massively) http://www.ruffer.co.uk/
FIL Limited (bought massively) https://www.fidelityworldwideinvestment.com/global/default.page
Investec Asset Management Ltd (sold massively) http://www.investecassetmanagement.com/
Phoenix Asset Management Partners Ltd. http://www.phoenixassetmanagement.com/

 Alpharius wrote:
I could have sworn we've already had this conversation, somewhat recently?

Not remembering any.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
I could have sworn we've already had this conversation, somewhat recently?

Not remembering any.

Touched on it in the 'Symptoms of...' thread. Didnt get into details though.

Honestly, it looks more like the long term holders from outside of GW are looking to cash out. They are probably regretting not doing so in 2004, and now with the stagnant numbers out of GW the dividends that do get paid out are not really advantageous over buring your money in coffee cans in the back yard when you consider inflation and what not.

Another indicator was along these lines was the interim dividend payout this year which is highly unusual. Normally dividends are issued with annual or semiannual reports...they are issuing a dividend this year in the middle of the second half period with no report indicating cash flow (will be interesting to see if they actually had the cash on hand due to things like the flurry of licenses or if they took out a loan again to pay dividends and keep the stock from tanking).

The next GW financial report will I think be very interesting.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I've been told GW is in talks to sell off the company. A lot of people have been discussing the possibilities, and I've been sitting on this info for a little while. In case it had been leaked to only my source, I didn't want to chance getting them in trouble, but with so many people discussing it, it's probably safe to discuss now. But I do have sources saying GW is looking to sell off. Pretre, feel free to add me as a 'monger on this-I don't have a timeframe for you, but I'd imagine the next year or two. I'm confident enough in my source to put my name on your thread.

It's been whispered about for quite a bit, I didn't think it was secret. Kirby wants to retire. All the cutbacks are just him making the company more attractive for a buyout offer.

I wonder if they'll be bought by Disney, or a videogame maker. Disney wants to expand its brand to teenage boys.

--Chris
www.chrisvalera.com

 Kroothawk wrote:
The Nomad Investment Partnership LP 16.2% (- 645,859 shares, January 18.7%)
Investec Asset Management Ltd 9.7% (- 2,612,235 shares, January 18.3%)
Ruffer LLP 8.1% (+ 1,757,260 shares, January 2.5%)
Tom Kirby 6.7% (same)
Phoenix Asset Management Partners Ltd. 5.9% (- 1,034,782 shares, January 9.3%)
FIL Limited 5.5% (+ 953,900 shares, January 2.5%)

(Sold 4,292,876 , bought 2,711,160)

Ownership changes can be relevant, if someone knows the investors.
Ruffer LLP (bought massively) http://www.ruffer.co.uk/
FIL Limited (bought massively) https://www.fidelityworldwideinvestment.com/global/default.page
Investec Asset Management Ltd (sold massively) http://www.investecassetmanagement.com/
Phoenix Asset Management Partners Ltd. http://www.phoenixassetmanagement.com/

 Alpharius wrote:
I could have sworn we've already had this conversation, somewhat recently?

Not remembering any.

There are some forums that can only be seen by moderators.

 filbert wrote:
It somewhat tallies with observations that others have made elsewhere on Dakka, to wit, that GW's recent corporate behaviour draws some striking comparisons with TSR prior to their takeover; that the recent business decisions being made at GW are indicative of a company positioning itself to make itself more appealing for a takeover bid.

Surely if its obvious to us that they're chasing short-term profit at the cost of long-term growth to try and appear more profitable to a buyer, then it'd be obvious to a buyer that they are doing the same thing?

Herzlos wrote:

 filbert wrote:
It somewhat tallies with observations that others have made elsewhere on Dakka, to wit, that GW's recent corporate behaviour draws some striking comparisons with TSR prior to their takeover; that the recent business decisions being made at GW are indicative of a company positioning itself to make itself more appealing for a takeover bid.

Surely if its obvious to us that they're chasing short-term profit at the cost of long-term growth to try and appear more profitable to a buyer, then it'd be obvious to a buyer that they are doing the same thing?

Of course. It's all part of the corporate dance that goes on whenever a takeover is planned. Effectively, GW/Tom Kirby are trying to drive the share price up as much as possible to ensure that they get the max return on their stake. They are doing this by aggressive cost cutting and restructuring etc.

A buyer might think he can do better.

There is a huge potential customer base for GW and they have a massive retail chain, so it wouldn't be difficult.

You can either exploit that chain with more product, or alternatively you can close down a lot of loss-making stores and pal up with independents and the Internet.

If Kirby genuinely is preparing to sell out and retire, he is clever enough to analyse whether he should aim for maximum share price or maximum dividend income before selling.

So what dose this all mean for your average wargamer?

40k should be safe, right?

 Happygrunt wrote:
So what dose this all mean for your average wargamer?

40k should be safe, right?

It means hold what you got, and ride the wave in. Feet and knees together and wait for the crunch.


Same as the 2d to 3d edition conversation, just a different name to it.

Your basic squad will more or less be safe- It's your Sergeants and special weapons that will probibly suffer.

 Grot 6 wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:
So what dose this all mean for your average wargamer?

40k should be safe, right?

It meand hold what you got, and ride the wave in. Feet and knees together and wait for the crunch.


Same as the 2d to 3d edition conversation, just a different name to it.

Your basic squad will more or less be safe- It's your Sergeants and special weapons that will probibly suffer.

What in The Emperor's name are you talking about?

 Happygrunt wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:
So what dose this all mean for your average wargamer?

40k should be safe, right?

It meand hold what you got, and ride the wave in. Feet and knees together and wait for the crunch.


Same as the 2d to 3d edition conversation, just a different name to it.

Your basic squad will more or less be safe- It's your Sergeants and special weapons that will probibly suffer.

What in The Emperor's name are you talking about?

It means enjoy your game, but be aware that changes will come sooner then expected and you can deal with them later...

 Happygrunt wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:
So what dose this all mean for your average wargamer?

40k should be safe, right?

It meand hold what you got, and ride the wave in. Feet and knees together and wait for the crunch.


Same as the 2d to 3d edition conversation, just a different name to it.

Your basic squad will more or less be safe- It's your Sergeants and special weapons that will probibly suffer.

What in The Emperor's name are you talking about?

Edit: Ah, now I understood

Myself, I'm a GW noob. I only joined the fun after the release of the 6th edition so I have no experience with the old GW that seemed to care, but here's my 2 hopeful thought: Considering everyone is complaining with the current GW business direction AND since 40k is a money making IP, can we possibily hope that change = good?

Alpharius wrote:I could have sworn we've already had this conversation, somewhat recently?

I know I brought up the Ruffer purchase in the old Symptoms thread. A couple "Hmmm.." but not much else.

Happygrunt wrote:So what dose this all mean for your average wargamer?

40k should be safe, right?

Anything can happen with a buyout. Depends on what type of buyer Kirby is shopping for. If it is someone who will keep the games going, not much. Someone looking to make maximum profit, who knows. Shuttering and selling off all operations and licensing off IP to other companies. Don't know if GW has a pension fund. The company I work for, was bought by a private investor in the 80's. He immediately sold off all divisions that were not "related to the core business" and also took the pension fund surplus that existed and used it to pay back the loan he got to buy the company. He was not popular.

 SupremeDalek wrote:

While I love their games, GW as a business makes me a bit angry.

Preach it brother!

I'm interested in seeing where all this goes. I guess we'll find out.

Not sure if you can read too much into it really. Large institutional investment houses have bought gw for a while (not necessarily for the share price- they like the dividends, which everyone else complains about). And they have often sold from time to time for various reasons.

I mean Quantum (george soros) had a big chunk a while ago which he picked up right before a tax change and dividend payment. He has since sold the stock down too (at least below the reported amounts on the Annual Report)

It would also be interesting to see who bought the other 1.5 million shares (from Kroothawk's post).

But whether it portends anything or not, we'll probably find out over the next couple of years (or less). I'd hate for it ever to be taken over by Disney or Hasbro.....

But if you are worried, just remember you own your figures and your games.....they can't take em away from you.

 Tethyr13 wrote:
Not sure if you can read too much into it really. Large institutional investment houses have bought gw for a while (not necessarily for the share price- they like the dividends, which everyone else complains about). And they have often sold from time to time for various reasons.

I mean Quantum (george soros) had a big chunk a while ago which he picked up right before a tax change and dividend payment. He has since sold the stock down too (at least below the reported amounts on the Annual Report)

It would also be interesting to see who bought the other 1.5 million shares (from Kroothawk's post).

But whether it portends anything or not, we'll probably find out over the next couple of years (or less). I'd hate for it ever to be taken over by Disney or Hasbro.....

But if you are worried, just remember you own your figures and your games.....they can't take em away from you.

I will give five internets to the person who emails Glen Beck with a story sufficiently convincing that he weaves GW into one of his (unintentionally)comedic conspiracy rants on his radio show, with a bonus internet if said rant uses the word "Redcoats" at least once

For some reason, everytime I see GW stuff I want to say "This is great news!", especially if its bad.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

Honestly, it looks more like the long term holders from outside of GW are looking to cash out. They are probably regretting not doing so in 2004, and now with the stagnant numbers out of GW the dividends that do get paid out are not really advantageous over buring your money in coffee cans in the back yard when you consider inflation and what not.

Or it might be that since GW stock has outperformed the index for some time, they don't see much further growth potential. Company which has done great recently and whichs' stock price has soared is not necessarily very good future investment (see Apple). Seriously, it's impossible to know what was the reasoning. It can be any number of things.

I've been expecting a sale since the codex-release rate went monthly.
Once all the codices are all up to current version, it's in a fair position for a buyout.
They're clearing the decks of all outstanding sculpts, to fill all the codex gaps.
After alll, what is GW going to do when they're all updated? Release 40k 7th ed 2 years after 6th?

So, at the rate of a codex a month, we're how far off buyout-day?

We will have 1-2 more Codices this year, so that is not the problem.

 Skinnereal wrote:
I've been expecting a sale since the codex-release rate went monthly.
Once all the codices are all up to current version, it's in a fair position for a buyout.
They're clearing the decks of all outstanding sculpts, to fill all the codex gaps.
After alll, what is GW going to do when they're all updated? Release 40k 7th ed 2 years after 6th?

So, at the rate of a codex a month, we're how far off buyout-day?

so far its been 1 dex every 3 months, there are 15 armies, and the stated length of a edition is 4 years. So they should be able to update every army before 7th. The downside is that it gives your armies viablity life of up to 4 years before having to rebuy, repaint, and start over. It also means you're looking at $240 a year ($20/month) just on books.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:
I've been expecting a sale since the codex-release rate went monthly.
Once all the codices are all up to current version, it's in a fair position for a buyout.
They're clearing the decks of all outstanding sculpts, to fill all the codex gaps.
After alll, what is GW going to do when they're all updated? Release 40k 7th ed 2 years after 6th?

So, at the rate of a codex a month, we're how far off buyout-day?

so far its been 1 dex every 3 months, there are 15 armies, and the stated length of a edition is 4 years. So they should be able to update every army before 7th. The downside is that it gives your armies viablity life of up to 4 years before having to rebuy, repaint, and start over. It also means you're looking at $240 a year ($20/month) just on books.

You do not need to buy every codex. I used to do this when the price was closer to the value but I dont anymore.

Also you do not have to start over every time an army is updated that is nonsense. If you just buy the minnimum units for whatever internet spam list is popular then you may have to buy a fair number of models. However, if you have been playing an army for awhile you might have to buy a couple of units and only then if you feel like you need them for tournaments.

Most codexes last longer than 4 editions and buying new models due to an edition change is even less likely than for a codex change. You may need to buy a unit or two but you dont need to start over.