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.

In a possibly vain attempt to tie this back into the topic of the thread (GW's latest financial report), I think that the end result is that GW has created a word of mouth marketing force that is actively trying to tell people not to buy their products. A good example of this is here on Dakka Dakka where the sheer number of alternatives being talked about goes up every day.

As well, news of specific products has never been able to spread faster. While GW's creation of a anti-marketing force means their social media efforts on anything but a local store level will be shouted down by detractors, other companies are free to use them as much as possible. We've never lived in a time when it's easier for a company to communicate directly with their customers, but GW's alienation of past customers has barred them from using this to the fullest extent possible.

 frozenwastes wrote:
In a possibly vain attempt to tie this back into the topic of the thread (GW's latest financial report), I think that the end result is that GW has created a word of mouth marketing force that is actively trying to tell people not to buy their products. A good example of this is here on Dakka Dakka where the sheer number of alternatives being talked about goes up every day.

As well, news of specific products has never been able to spread faster. While GW's creation of a anti-marketing force means their social media efforts on anything but a local store level will be shouted down by detractors, other companies are free to use them as much as possible. We've never lived in a time when it's easier for a company to communicate directly with their customers, but GW's alienation of past customers has barred them from using this to the fullest extent possible.

I think you really hit the nail on the head, as far as the practical outcome is concerned. I particularly like the idea of an anti-marketing force. Like it or not, there is a large group of hobbyists who actively campaign against GW, which would be troubling to any company. I believe we're beginning to really see the effects of this group in the reports.

I have to say, I'm one of them. I would never proselytize for GW, and if someone asked me about starting either game (and really, they only have two major games) I would have to advise against it. There are so many other companies that respect their customers and offer a better value.

Game of X-wing anyone?
I got more stuff today....
hehehe

 cincydooley wrote:
If I'm reading it correctly, I think the real attitude is one you find in Steven Covey:

Don't worry about the things outside your sphere of control or influence.

Ever since I read that book as part of some on-job enrichment, I've really tried to do that. Obviously (as evidenced by Dakka) it doesn't always happen, but the more I find myself letting go of worrying about things I can't change, the lower my stress level becomes.

With GW in particular, there's only so much you can control or influence about how GW HQ does business. What you can control is how much GW you buy or how often you frequent the GW shop. You can potentially increase that sphere by writing (well articulated and focused) letters to GW Corporate. I just don't know how much complaining on Dakka does to help expand either of those spheres, ya know?

If the TTWG community channeled all that worry into spheres we can control, everyone would have painted armies .

It's ok you can't shift someone's paradigm if they don't want it shifted... That horse has turned into a pile of bones now and rattles every time it's kicked.

 frozenwastes wrote:
In a possibly vain attempt to tie this back into the topic of the thread (GW's latest financial report), I think that the end result is that GW has created a word of mouth marketing force that is actively trying to tell people not to buy their products. A good example of this is here on Dakka Dakka where the sheer number of alternatives being talked about goes up every day.

As well, news of specific products has never been able to spread faster. While GW's creation of a anti-marketing force means their social media efforts on anything but a local store level will be shouted down by detractors, other companies are free to use them as much as possible. We've never lived in a time when it's easier for a company to communicate directly with their customers, but GW's alienation of past customers has barred them from using this to the fullest extent possible.

I think you summed it up best here. There is a dedicated anti-GW force on the internet that has grown out over the years. Heck there are people that are still angry at GW over the format change of White Dwarf to a GW only magazine. That was over 20 years ago!

Though with all the alternative games, some of those companies are making the same mistakes people are holding against GW or sometimes even worse.

On Kirby's comments, a friend who works in the video game industry brought up a interesting point. Kirby's statements were very similar in head slapping and smug tone that Bobby Kotick, the head of Activision, would make in his public statements. Kotick is know to deliberately troll Activision detractors and the competition. He felt Kirby was making some of those statements knowingly they would incite the anti-GW people.

Couple of Kotick's best quotes form a few years ago was, "taking all the fun out of making video games," and encouraging a corporate culture of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear."

Kirby may be sitting back and enjoying all the people eating their livers over his comments.

He may well be, but did this Kotick guy make his comments in public or in the financial report that would be read by investors, many of whom wouldn't have the necessary "in" knowledge to appreciate the joke and would take his comments at face value?

As there's a hell of a difference between throwing out a press release and what Kirby has done.

Either way, it demonstrates his contempt for those who are/were or could be customers again. I'm willing to keep a toe in GW's bath until he retires, if there are the beginnings of an apparent culture change then great, otherwise I'll be done completely.

Kotick and Kirby are quite similar.

One now owns one of the biggest entertainment producing companies in the world and the other runs some niche 'army mens' company in order to fund his retirement.

 silent25 wrote:
... Kirby's statements were very similar in head slapping and smug tone that Bobby Kotick, the head of Activision, would make in his public statements.

Couple of Kotick's best quotes form a few years ago was, "taking all the fun out of making video games," and encouraging a corporate culture of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear."
.

and yet financial journalists, used to reading chairmen's and CEO's statements, believe his direct, unpretentious approach is admirable. Funny old world, eh?

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 silent25 wrote:
... Kirby's statements were very similar in head slapping and smug tone that Bobby Kotick, the head of Activision, would make in his public statements.

Couple of Kotick's best quotes form a few years ago was, "taking all the fun out of making video games," and encouraging a corporate culture of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear."
.

and yet financial journalists, used to reading chairmen's and CEO's statements, believe his direct, unpretentious approach is admirable. Funny old world, eh?

Are you referring to the Telegraph article? Because I think you've woefully misread the tone of that article.

If not, care to provide links? I'm always open to reading what would be considered a more objective view.

 azreal13 wrote:
He may well be, but did this Kotick guy make his comments in public or in the financial report that would be read by investors, many of whom wouldn't have the necessary "in" knowledge to appreciate the joke and would take his comments at face value?

As there's a hell of a difference between throwing out a press release and what Kirby has done.

Either way, it demonstrates his contempt for those who are/were or could be customers again. I'm willing to keep a toe in GW's bath until he retires, if there are the beginnings of an apparent culture change then great, otherwise I'll be done completely.

It was made during a teleconference phone call to high level investors in 2009. Media was invited to listen in on the phone call and report what was said.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 silent25 wrote:
... Kirby's statements were very similar in head slapping and smug tone that Bobby Kotick, the head of Activision, would make in his public statements.

Couple of Kotick's best quotes form a few years ago was, "taking all the fun out of making video games," and encouraging a corporate culture of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear."
.

and yet financial journalists, used to reading chairmen's and CEO's statements, believe his direct, unpretentious approach is admirable. Funny old world, eh?

Do you mean what was written in the Telegraph? I though it was more mocking than congratulatory.

 azreal13 wrote:


Are you referring to the Telegraph article? Because I think you've woefully misread the tone of that article.

If not, care to provide links? I'm always open to reading what would be considered a more objective view.

Well, we are in areas of subjectivity here, but "firmly grounded in reality and disarmingly honest" sounds like a positive description to me. You're welcome to say I'm bringing my own preconceptions, who doesn't? But I think you might be. Perloff, with whom Kirby is compared, is pretty well-regarded. If she'd said Gerald Ratner I would agree with you. I think it's a pretty shallow piece knocked out to a deadline, so her respect for his forthrightness is hardly a ringing endorsement. But I'd say it's a positive piece.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:


Are you referring to the Telegraph article? Because I think you've woefully misread the tone of that article.

If not, care to provide links? I'm always open to reading what would be considered a more objective view.

Well, we are in areas of subjectivity here, but "firmly grounded in reality and disarmingly honest" sounds like a positive description to me. You're welcome to say I'm bringing my own preconceptions, who doesn't? But I think you might be. Perloff, with whom Kirby is compared, is pretty well-regarded. If she'd said Gerald Ratner I would agree with you. I think it's a pretty shallow piece knocked out to a deadline, so her respect for his forthrightness is hardly a ringing endorsement. But I'd say it's a positive piece.

Well, I think you're probably in the minority from what I remember from when it was first linked, but we all view the world through a lens of our own prejudice, and I'm certainly too knackered to go digging it up and arguing the minutiae of her turn of phrase and choice of language.

The correct thing for GW to do with regard to being a PLC is to make a profit and make themselves attractive to investors. This is what they are doing.

pause

pause

pause

... and this is the problem.

When comments are made about the GW haters and that they will always hate GW, the poster fails to understand why there is so much anger and frustration with GW. The original heart, soul & purpose of GW is no longer there. You see posts about the old "deodorant" scratch built vehicle articles and that highlights the problems precisely.

To the left of me on my desk is a copy of White Dwarf, it's issue 72 and it has Cthulhu image as the front cover. It also lists the three following pieces inside:

SLIEGH WARS
A Chaotic Christmas Boardgame

THE JEWEL IN THE CROWN
Talisman Receives Expansive Coverage

THE NECKLACE OF BRISINGAMEN
High Level Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Adventure

In fact the correct title for this copy is The Role Playing Games Monthly White Dwarf. Just a small point.

On the inside cover is an advert for the board game "Warrior Knights". Opposite is a mail order page showing Judge Dredd, Talisman 2nd edition, Queen Victoria and the Holy Grail & Chill (endorsed by Stephan King, no less). The current editor is a Mr Ian Livingstone. Flicking through, there are game reviews, a scenario for Cthulhu called "Fear of Flying", a page of Thrud, an AD&D scenario, Sleigh Wars free game, Tabletop Heroes, Travellers (comic strip for those who didn't know), probably about 10 pages of ads... from other company's & businesses and a small ads section. Obviously that's not all, but I didn't want to bore you / make you cry as you remember how it was.

Issue 72, was the December 1985 edition and probably around about a year or so before there was mention of games like Warhammer Fantasy and in fact some time after Rogue Trader. It was a time when GW was producing, under license, various games. Games like Judge Dredd, Paranoia, Call of Cthulhu, Stormbringer, etc. Citadel was producing models for the gamers. Remember getting hold of a Citadel model and painting it up for your roleplaying character.

You got the feeling that the guys behind GW & Citadel were keen gaming geeks, like yourself, and had a passion for different systems. They no doubt, as time went by, had a desire to make their own worlds. These we saw in the birth of Warhammer Fantasy & Rogue Trader. At some point they obviously decide to concentrate on their own range, which makes sense and we have the birth of GW as the maker of it's own systems and models.

In fact I thought at this point to have a look to see if there was a clear history out there. I found a Wiki pages and here is what it says about the beginnings of GW:

Founded in 1975 at 15 Bolingbroke Road, London, by John Peake, Ian Livingstone, and Steve Jackson (not to be confused with US citizen Steve Jackson, also a games designer), Games Workshop was originally a manufacturer of wooden boards for games such as backgammon, mancala, Nine Men's Morris, and Go[3] which later became an importer of the U.S. role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons, and then a publisher of wargames and role-playing games in its own right, expanding from a bedroom mail-order company in the process.

In order to promote their business, postal games, create a games club, and provide an alternative source for games news, the newsletter, Owl and Weasel, was founded in February 1975. This was superseded in June 1977 by White Dwarf.

From the outset, there was a clear stated interest in print regarding "progressive games," including computer gaming[4] which led to the departure of traditionalist Peake in early 1976, and the loss of GW's main source of income.[5] However, having successfully obtained official distribution rights to Dungeons & Dragons and other TSR products in the UK, and maintaining a high profile by running games conventions, the business grew rapidly. It opened its first retail shop in April 1978.

In early 1979, Games Workshop provided the funding to found Citadel Miniatures in Newark-on-Trent. Citadel would produce the metal miniatures used in role-playing and table-top wargames. The Citadel name became synonymous with Games Workshop Miniatures, and continues to be a trademarked brand name used in association with them long after the Citadel company was absorbed into Games Workshop.[6][7] For a time, Gary Gygax promoted the idea of TSR, Inc. merging with Games Workshop, until Steve Jackson and Ian Livingstone backed out.[8]

The company's publishing arm also released UK reprints of American RPGs such as Call of Cthulhu, Runequest, Traveller, and Middle-earth Role Playing, which were expensive to import, having previously done so for Dungeons & Dragons from 1977.[9]

In 1984, Games Workshop ceased distributing its products in the USA through Hobby Games Distributors and opened its Games Workshop (US) office. Games Workshop (US), and Games Workshop in general, went through a large growth phase in the late '80s, listing over 250 employees on the payroll by 1990.[10]

Following a management buyout in December 1991, the company refocused on their most lucrative lines, namely their miniature wargames Warhammer Fantasy Battle (WFB) and Warhammer 40,000 (WH40K). The retail chain refocused on a younger, more family-oriented market. The change of direction was a great success and the company enjoyed growing profits, but the move lost the company some of its old fan base. The complaints of old customers led a breakaway group of two GW employees to publish Fantasy Warlord in competition with GW, but this met with little success. Games Workshop expanded in Europe, the USA, Canada, and Australia, opening new branches and organizing events in each new commercial territory. The company was floated on the London Stock Exchange in October 1994.

It's at this point that everything changes. It's the start of a path that leads to where we are today. Yes it's right that a publically listed company makes a profit for it's investors, but it also makes it a bad choice for a games company. As a PLC the sole purpose of the company is to make themselves attractive to investors and to do that they have to be always making more profit than they did the year before.

If you're happy with the knowledge that GW are just out to get your money, then fine, it's your call. Good luck to you and keep enjoying it. However there are a big chunk of us that know exactly what GW are up to and will say something about it, because we remember when it was about gaming, not screwing the customer over.

i liked your post, Wolfstan, but don't share your conclusion...
as a GW customer since 1985, i fail to see how GW is screwing the customer...
the customer chooses to purchase a product, and then receives that product...
done deal...
if the product is faulty, GW replaces it...
end of...

now, i understand why people don't like the current direction of the company, but that is a whole different kettle of fish..
if GW fails to make the customer want their product, then the bottom line suffers...
that is their problem...
they can try out any idea they please...
it will either make money, or not...

as a GW customer, i don't feel that i have ever been screwed by them...
i buy what i like, and don't buy what i don't like...
every month they release at least one product i like, and buy...
they get my money, but neither blindly nor grudgingly...
i enjoy what i buy, and don't see why everything has to be so serious in the land of toy soldiers...

cheers
jah

I'm with Wolfstan on this one except for terminology. It isn't so much that GW "screwed" us in my mind, more like abandoned us.

Sure we can vote with our money, but it doesn't change the fact that the product we were originally sold has vastly changed, and in many ways moved far away from the original ideas that we bought into and loved.

The timing listed couldn't be more correct Wolfstan.

 Wolfstan wrote:
Yes it's right that a publically listed company makes a profit for it's investors, but it also makes it a bad choice for a games company. As a PLC the sole purpose of the company is to make themselves attractive to investors and to do that they have to be always making more profit than they did the year before.

Let's keep in mind that there wasn't a strange mythical light and suddenly GW was a PLC.
It was the decision by Tom Kirby that from now on, GW's sole purpose should be to bring big profits to him and the other big shareholders. Good for him, bad for us. Esp. as the raised money isn't used in the company, you know, for crazy things like making it grow again.

i liked your post, Wolfstan, but don't share your conclusion...
as a GW customer since 1985, i fail to see how GW is screwing the customer...
the customer chooses to purchase a product, and then receives that product...
done deal...
if the product is faulty, GW replaces it...
end of...

I see why you wouldn't think that, but reason I used the term was down to how they see customers now. It's all about "churn". It's about bringing out nice new shiney's for people to buy, but their big thrust is the bulk buyers. The new kids coming into hobby and getting mum & dad to fork out £150 - £200 in one hit. Then perhaps going back for a couple of more £50 hits. Some of those will stay, but their buying will drop bigtime, so they need to get more buyers. The circle of purchasing continues (sorry Disney!). There are no big tournament events any more, the stores are changing to one man stores (don't get me started on their bricks & mortar restriction for indies, a restriction that they now don't seem to be too worried about) or the fact that the rules are average.

Don't forget for a lot of GW gamers out there, this is all they know. They came into the scene when GW had it all to themselves, so these customers invested big time in them. No need to worry about getting a game, just pop down to your local GW store. The thing is, we are now entering another period when it comes to gaming, a period similar to the late 80's, when there were ton's of gaming systems around, albeit that they were rpg's or board games. This gaming period has a wider audience this time due to things like the interweb and kickstarter. Rpg's are going strong. Company's like Fantasy Flight Games are making boardgames that are pretty impressive. There are dozens of tabletop systems out there that most people know of and play, with even more stuff coming on line due to Kickstarter projects.

So when I refer to GW screwing customers it's about the fact that it's not about creating and supporting a gaming community, it's about how much money that they can get out of their customers. Which as I've have said, is the correct approach for a PLC, but not really compatible with the gaming community.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 Wolfstan wrote:
Yes it's right that a publically listed company makes a profit for it's investors, but it also makes it a bad choice for a games company. As a PLC the sole purpose of the company is to make themselves attractive to investors and to do that they have to be always making more profit than they did the year before.

Let's keep in mind that there wasn't a strange mythical light and suddenly GW was a PLC.
It was the decision by Tom Kirby that from now on, GW's sole purpose should be to bring big profits to him and the other big shareholders. Good for him, bad for us. Esp. as the raised money isn't used in the company, you know, for crazy things like making it grow again.

If you're going to take a anti-GW approach, Wolfstan's is the correct view. It's how a PLC operates. GW are not in the slightest bit unusual - the structure of a PLC is horrible, there to make profits for investors, but even more, for the people who make money moving shares around. You can blame Kirby, but really it's the system that's at fault.

I had an argument with someone here who refused to believe it, but it's widely accepted that the Plc structure is horrible for our business culture and promotes short-termism, and has the effect that the CEO is invariably fixated more on share price than long-term goals. Within those constraints, GW is a pretty good company compared to cynical big brother types like Tesco, insurance companies, or banks, which is all that is left of British industry.

Anyway, I'm sat typing this in Warhammer world, just drank some really good GW espresso, and have met with dozens of really nice, helpful GW staff, so you can take my commetns with as many pinches of salt as you wish. I did, however, manage to resist the same nice staff trying to upsell from £50 worth of Forgeworld to £150...

Complaining that one person is running down the company for sole personal profit is not anti-GW, it is actually pro-GW.

A lot of modern marketing theory and practice is concerned with the need to create an emotional bond between the brand and the customer.

 Wolfstan wrote:

i liked your post, Wolfstan, but don't share your conclusion...
as a GW customer since 1985, i fail to see how GW is screwing the customer...
the customer chooses to purchase a product, and then receives that product...
done deal...
if the product is faulty, GW replaces it...
end of...

I see why you wouldn't think that, but reason I used the term was down to how they see customers now. It's all about "churn". It's about bringing out nice new shiney's for people to buy, but their big thrust is the bulk buyers. The new kids coming into hobby and getting mum & dad to fork out £150 - £200 in one hit. Then perhaps going back for a couple of more £50 hits. Some of those will stay, but their buying will drop bigtime, so they need to get more buyers. The circle of purchasing continues (sorry Disney!). There are no big tournament events any more, the stores are changing to one man stores (don't get me started on their bricks & mortar restriction for indies, a restriction that they now don't seem to be too worried about) or the fact that the rules are average.

Don't forget for a lot of GW gamers out there, this is all they know. They came into the scene when GW had it all to themselves, so these customers invested big time in them. No need to worry about getting a game, just pop down to your local GW store. The thing is, we are now entering another period when it comes to gaming, a period similar to the late 80's, when there were ton's of gaming systems around, albeit that they were rpg's or board games. This gaming period has a wider audience this time due to things like the interweb and kickstarter. Rpg's are going strong. Company's like Fantasy Flight Games are making boardgames that are pretty impressive. There are dozens of tabletop systems out there that most people know of and play, with even more stuff coming on line due to Kickstarter projects.

So when I refer to GW screwing customers it's about the fact that it's not about creating and supporting a gaming community, it's about how much money that they can get out of their customers. Which as I've have said, is the correct approach for a PLC, but not really compatible with the gaming community.

This! For those of us who bought armies years and years ago it was an investment of our time and seemed a good one because GW was a new and incredible experience: it had a culture, a community it participated in.

It has changed to a "standard" registered stock company.

All the "perks" are gone and the old war gamers feel abandoned or betrayed.

An obvious "non-gamer" is at the helm and demonstrates his lack of understanding or empathy.

He is GREAT for investors as pointed out, all they need is to show the board of directors play a game of apocalypse and they may be forgiven...

 Talizvar wrote:

 Wolfstan wrote:

i liked your post, Wolfstan, but don't share your conclusion...
as a GW customer since 1985, i fail to see how GW is screwing the customer...
the customer chooses to purchase a product, and then receives that product...
done deal...
if the product is faulty, GW replaces it...
end of...

I see why you wouldn't think that, but reason I used the term was down to how they see customers now. It's all about "churn". It's about bringing out nice new shiney's for people to buy, but their big thrust is the bulk buyers. The new kids coming into hobby and getting mum & dad to fork out £150 - £200 in one hit. Then perhaps going back for a couple of more £50 hits. Some of those will stay, but their buying will drop bigtime, so they need to get more buyers. The circle of purchasing continues (sorry Disney!). There are no big tournament events any more, the stores are changing to one man stores (don't get me started on their bricks & mortar restriction for indies, a restriction that they now don't seem to be too worried about) or the fact that the rules are average.

Don't forget for a lot of GW gamers out there, this is all they know. They came into the scene when GW had it all to themselves, so these customers invested big time in them. No need to worry about getting a game, just pop down to your local GW store. The thing is, we are now entering another period when it comes to gaming, a period similar to the late 80's, when there were ton's of gaming systems around, albeit that they were rpg's or board games. This gaming period has a wider audience this time due to things like the interweb and kickstarter. Rpg's are going strong. Company's like Fantasy Flight Games are making boardgames that are pretty impressive. There are dozens of tabletop systems out there that most people know of and play, with even more stuff coming on line due to Kickstarter projects.

So when I refer to GW screwing customers it's about the fact that it's not about creating and supporting a gaming community, it's about how much money that they can get out of their customers. Which as I've have said, is the correct approach for a PLC, but not really compatible with the gaming community.

This! For those of us who bought armies years and years ago it was an investment of our time and seemed a good one because GW was a new and incredible experience: it had a culture, a community it participated in.

It has changed to a "standard" registered stock company.

All the "perks" are gone and the old war gamers feel abandoned or betrayed.

An obvious "non-gamer" is at the helm and demonstrates his lack of understanding or empathy.

He is GREAT for investors as pointed out, all they need is to show the board of directors play a game of apocalypse and they may be forgiven...

Sorry but I disagree with that - unless you've been playing GW since RT, the Company has been public for most of 2nd Edition with Kirby at the head of it and EVEN BEFORE THAT Kirby was in charge of the Company. To say since it went public is a fallacy as the Company has been public since 1994 and was a highly leveraged company prior to the management buyout. Under Kirby, the Company has expanded its foot print in the world, has virtually no debt, and has added a core game (which hasn't received the same enthusiasm as its core games WH40K and WHFB). To say GW had all of these core games is wrong as well - they were specialist games then and until recently they were still specialist games. These games were not self supportive which is why they got the axe. How often did you buy a Necromunda gang? How many people did you play Necromunda with? Same goes for Epic40K, Blood Bowl, Mordheim, Warmaster, BFG, et al. I loved those games too but rarely could I EVER get a game in. At one point Orlando had Blood Bowl leagues out the wazoo but they dried up long before the Specialist line was closed. Heck with the flop that was their naval battle games, I'm surprised they would even venture to put anything else back out.

What perks are you referring to? As an accountant, I think my definition of perks is very different from what you're thinking. I'm thinking more along the lines of perks for employees. I've been gaming since 94 and the only thing I will complain about is the White Dwarf publication. Other than that, I can look at their financials and can tell that their price increases are primarily driven by increases in cost not because they are sticking it to you.

Well, my lunch break is over. I'm sure someone somewhere on the Internets will be highly offended or think I'm an arse.

Exalted Boyd. Rationality is awesome

boyd wrote:

Sorry but I disagree with that - unless you've been playing GW since RT, the Company has been public for most of 2nd Edition with Kirby at the head of it and EVEN BEFORE THAT Kirby was in charge of the Company. To say since it went public is a fallacy as the Company has been public since 1994 and was a highly leveraged company prior to the management buyout. Under Kirby, the Company has expanded its foot print in the world, has virtually no debt, and has added a core game (which hasn't received the same enthusiasm as its core games WH40K and WHFB). To say GW had all of these core games is wrong as well - they were specialist games then and until recently they were still specialist games. These games were not self supportive which is why they got the axe. How often did you buy a Necromunda gang? How many people did you play Necromunda with? Same goes for Epic40K, Blood Bowl, Mordheim, Warmaster, BFG, et al. I loved those games too but rarely could I EVER get a game in. At one point Orlando had Blood Bowl leagues out the wazoo but they dried up long before the Specialist line was closed. Heck with the flop that was their naval battle games, I'm surprised they would even venture to put anything else back out.

What perks are you referring to? As an accountant, I think my definition of perks is very different from what you're thinking. I'm thinking more along the lines of perks for employees. I've been gaming since 94 and the only thing I will complain about is the White Dwarf publication. Other than that, I can look at their financials and can tell that their price increases are primarily driven by increases in cost not because they are sticking it to you.

Well, my lunch break is over. I'm sure someone somewhere on the Internets will be highly offended or think I'm an arse.

Just to bring up an additional point about Kirby. He came to GW in 1986 as general manager and was brought in by Bryan Ansell. Prior to that he worked at TSR's British office.

boyd wrote:

 Talizvar wrote:

 Wolfstan wrote:

i liked your post, Wolfstan, but don't share your conclusion...
as a GW customer since 1985, i fail to see how GW is screwing the customer...
the customer chooses to purchase a product, and then receives that product...
done deal...
if the product is faulty, GW replaces it...
end of...

I see why you wouldn't think that, but reason I used the term was down to how they see customers now. It's all about "churn". It's about bringing out nice new shiney's for people to buy, but their big thrust is the bulk buyers. The new kids coming into hobby and getting mum & dad to fork out £150 - £200 in one hit. Then perhaps going back for a couple of more £50 hits. Some of those will stay, but their buying will drop bigtime, so they need to get more buyers. The circle of purchasing continues (sorry Disney!). There are no big tournament events any more, the stores are changing to one man stores (don't get me started on their bricks & mortar restriction for indies, a restriction that they now don't seem to be too worried about) or the fact that the rules are average.

Don't forget for a lot of GW gamers out there, this is all they know. They came into the scene when GW had it all to themselves, so these customers invested big time in them. No need to worry about getting a game, just pop down to your local GW store. The thing is, we are now entering another period when it comes to gaming, a period similar to the late 80's, when there were ton's of gaming systems around, albeit that they were rpg's or board games. This gaming period has a wider audience this time due to things like the interweb and kickstarter. Rpg's are going strong. Company's like Fantasy Flight Games are making boardgames that are pretty impressive. There are dozens of tabletop systems out there that most people know of and play, with even more stuff coming on line due to Kickstarter projects.

So when I refer to GW screwing customers it's about the fact that it's not about creating and supporting a gaming community, it's about how much money that they can get out of their customers. Which as I've have said, is the correct approach for a PLC, but not really compatible with the gaming community.

This! For those of us who bought armies years and years ago it was an investment of our time and seemed a good one because GW was a new and incredible experience: it had a culture, a community it participated in.

It has changed to a "standard" registered stock company.

All the "perks" are gone and the old war gamers feel abandoned or betrayed.

An obvious "non-gamer" is at the helm and demonstrates his lack of understanding or empathy.

He is GREAT for investors as pointed out, all they need is to show the board of directors play a game of apocalypse and they may be forgiven...

Sorry but I disagree with that - unless you've been playing GW since RT, the Company has been public for most of 2nd Edition with Kirby at the head of it and EVEN BEFORE THAT Kirby was in charge of the Company. To say since it went public is a fallacy as the Company has been public since 1994 and was a highly leveraged company prior to the management buyout. Under Kirby, the Company has expanded its foot print in the world, has virtually no debt, and has added a core game (which hasn't received the same enthusiasm as its core games WH40K and WHFB). To say GW had all of these core games is wrong as well - they were specialist games then and until recently they were still specialist games. These games were not self supportive which is why they got the axe. How often did you buy a Necromunda gang? How many people did you play Necromunda with? Same goes for Epic40K, Blood Bowl, Mordheim, Warmaster, BFG, et al. I loved those games too but rarely could I EVER get a game in. At one point Orlando had Blood Bowl leagues out the wazoo but they dried up long before the Specialist line was closed. Heck with the flop that was their naval battle games, I'm surprised they would even venture to put anything else back out.

What perks are you referring to? As an accountant, I think my definition of perks is very different from what you're thinking. I'm thinking more along the lines of perks for employees. I've been gaming since 94 and the only thing I will complain about is the White Dwarf publication. Other than that, I can look at their financials and can tell that their price increases are primarily driven by increases in cost not because they are sticking it to you.

Well, my lunch break is over. I'm sure someone somewhere on the Internets will be highly offended or think I'm an arse.

So you are choosing to ignore the fact that GW stores started to cut back on allowing gamers to use their board or sit there and paint, or that the stores were downsized to one man stores, that the tournament scene has all but gone (do they even run any thing any more), that they have cut back on the type of stock they hold in store. I'm not going to even go there about price, that's a personal choice, and been hammered to death a few times.

All this adds up to what a PLC should be doing, but and it's a BIG but, it's not something that works that well with gaming.

When i got into 40k in the 90s there was obviously no GW store anywhere near me, but I read about them in White Dwarf. When I ended up in Europe for a summer I found a local GW Hobby Centre. It was glorious. There were people playing games with only painted models. The hobby tables (yes, more than one) were large and I could try out any of their hobby products. I also arrived at a fortuitous time and the employee announced it was time for their weekly "conversion corner" and for a few dollars I got the parts needed to build a custom Space Marine sergeant. I got taught how to use a pin vise and putty. Three other guys and myself did a group build for the next couple hours and my first conversion was born.

The experience walking into a GW store today is so very different.

While it is true that Kirby was at the helm for GW's massive expansion from the UK into a global company, the previous culture of creativity and fan involvement lasted a solid decade after that. With 3rd edition 40k's release and the callous halving of point values to sell more models (and the same thing for Fantasy in 2000) marked the beginning of the end and the transformation of the customer into a target for cash milking. Andy Chambers did a pretty amazing job of keeping the creative side of things alive through 2004 with the Index Astartes series and the Eye of Terror Campaign.

You'll hear ex-studio people talk about this time of transition is less than favourable terms as well. It really was the end of an era.

If Kirby has helmed the company through its expansion into its current state of graceful decline, perhaps the theory he is running it as his personal pension plan has some legs.

 silent25 wrote:

boyd wrote:

Sorry but I disagree with that - unless you've been playing GW since RT, the Company has been public for most of 2nd Edition with Kirby at the head of it and EVEN BEFORE THAT Kirby was in charge of the Company. To say since it went public is a fallacy as the Company has been public since 1994 and was a highly leveraged company prior to the management buyout. Under Kirby, the Company has expanded its foot print in the world, has virtually no debt, and has added a core game (which hasn't received the same enthusiasm as its core games WH40K and WHFB). To say GW had all of these core games is wrong as well - they were specialist games then and until recently they were still specialist games. These games were not self supportive which is why they got the axe. How often did you buy a Necromunda gang? How many people did you play Necromunda with? Same goes for Epic40K, Blood Bowl, Mordheim, Warmaster, BFG, et al. I loved those games too but rarely could I EVER get a game in. At one point Orlando had Blood Bowl leagues out the wazoo but they dried up long before the Specialist line was closed. Heck with the flop that was their naval battle games, I'm surprised they would even venture to put anything else back out.

What perks are you referring to? As an accountant, I think my definition of perks is very different from what you're thinking. I'm thinking more along the lines of perks for employees. I've been gaming since 94 and the only thing I will complain about is the White Dwarf publication. Other than that, I can look at their financials and can tell that their price increases are primarily driven by increases in cost not because they are sticking it to you.

Well, my lunch break is over. I'm sure someone somewhere on the Internets will be highly offended or think I'm an arse.

Just to bring up an additional point about Kirby. He came to GW in 1986 as general manager and was brought in by Bryan Ansell. Prior to that he worked at TSR's British office.

As in, THAT TSR?

Explains a lot....

boyd wrote:

Under Kirby, the Company has expanded its foot print in the world, has virtually no debt, and has added a core game (which hasn't received the same enthusiasm as its core games WH40K and WHFB). To say GW had all of these core games is wrong as well - they were specialist games then and until recently they were still specialist games. These games were not self supportive which is why they got the axe. How often did you buy a Necromunda gang? How many people did you play Necromunda with? Same goes for Epic40K, Blood Bowl, Mordheim, Warmaster, BFG, et al. I loved those games too but rarely could I EVER get a game in. At one point Orlando had Blood Bowl leagues out the wazoo but they dried up long before the Specialist line was closed. Heck with the flop that was their naval battle games, I'm surprised they would even venture to put anything else back out.

Have you thought it might possibly be a peculiarity to your area that you couldn't get to play the specialist games? I certainly had no trouble at all, and if anything the opposite was true. My time with GW games as a child, a teenager, eventually even working in the store the Specialist game events were always packed. People had to be turned away from Blood Bowl leagues, and the response to a new Necromunda or Mordheim campaign was always manic. GW pumped out a huge variety of games for almost 20 years (the name 'Games Workshop' has since become something of an ironic yoke around the neck of the company), and you have to think that had these games not been profitable the company would have slipped into its narrow, single direction track long before.

No, the reason those games were dropped was because a ) they sated the new customers desire to get involved for far too cheap a price, allowing kids to come into the game, like you say buy a Necromunda gang and leave the hobby, rather than hundreds of £'s of bits as it is now and b ) it was part of a corporate re-structuring that involved refocusing the company on core products. Despite this the 'specialist' games have survived and still have committed fan communities. I had it on a good authority also that Jervis Johnson kept up the upkeep of the Specialist games for years completely off of his own back, and without any extra financial incentive to do so. The alternative was for those games (and the entire model range) to be dropped entirely, which apparently was the 'suits' originally intent. Jervis knows all too well what those games have meant to the wargaming community and so knew it was important that they persisted in some form; this really illustrates the point that Wolfstan and Talizvar have made about GW no longer being run by people who care about games. That despite their massive profits, and huge scale of the company, they were not prepared to take some knock on their profits (or at least, be marginally less efficient), the huge masses of gamers who enjoy those classic games be damned.

Is that a good or a bad thing? Shouldn't the needs of the shareholder come first? And if so at what point do you draw the line? I'm of the opinion that some things, those that involve art and creativity, should sometimes move beyond the kind of hardline capitalist mentality whereby you strip the soul from something to make a few extra % on an already profitable venture.

Regarding Dreadfleet, in a way I think it was something of a self-fulfilling prophecy, and its lack of success was down to more than the critical reviews the game generally received. The current fan-base of (especially younger) players had become so narrow in terms of their conception of a wargame (28mm miniatures, based in either one or the other well established fantasy universe) that I think there was an element of Dreadfleet befuddling them. Not only that, but the other games are so bloody expensive that if you collect either 40k or WFB, that doesn't leave a whole lot of money left over for anything else. In the past people would collect most if not all of the skirmish/individual games, a pattern that has been repeated again these days where often people will collect and play Infinity, Star Wars, Malifaux, board games etc. et. ..or just the one force for GW's 'core' (read: only) games.

Anyway, just my thoughts on the topic! I think it's a dreadful shame that GW has become so myopic in its releases of new games and systems, in a time when new technology and communication methods should make it easier than ever to be creative and break new ground. Perhaps they didn't get the $ haul that they do nowadays, but I would love for a return to the mid to late 90's of letting their design guys exercise their creative muscles.