Grimtuff wrote:


As in, THAT TSR?

Explains a lot....

 Wolfstan wrote:

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.

 Pacific wrote:

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.

boyd wrote:

 Wolfstan wrote:

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.

No just the accountant in me kept conjuring up images of real perks, like company cars, fuel cards, company jets,etc. you know real perks.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
After a period of decline TSR went bust after over investing in a few products that didn't work out. Through the late 80s and early 90s they became characterised by over zealous legal actions that made them a source of ridicule by internet fan sites that they attacked. No real relevance I can see.

boyd wrote:
No just the accountant in me kept conjuring up images of real perks, like company cars, fuel cards, company jets,etc. you know real perks.

 Talizvar wrote:

- Assembly, painting and most forms of gaming is not offered in their stores anymore.

- They had hundreds (thousands?) of hobby articles removed from their site.

- They sponsored competitions at local hobby stores which is no longer supported.

- In the first Apocalypse release their version of the "single click deals" truly were a deal, not just a conservation on the number of clicks.

- The notes in the 2013 financial reports appeared to have some measure of... ridicule for it's customers, most statements I would see from other companies would include management as customers as well (gamers for gamers?).

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
I'm glad GW have a big, successful business making things in a 1st word country, rather than outsourcing to China, and I was genuinely surprised by the high level of enthusiasm and skills of the people who work for GW.

 frozenwastes wrote:
I've heard enough interviews with people on the ground floor of TSR's demise (like Peter Adkinson who bought them out) to know that TSR's error was fragmenting their customer base into multiple product lines and releasing products too rapidly. In the last few years of TSR, they flooded the market with everything imaginable in the hopes of finding something that sticks.

GW doesn't really fragment their customer base. Warhammer and LOTR are not really pulling their weight compared to 40k and GW is always willing to concentrate on 40k. They seem to have sped up their books and supplements release scedule, but their model kit releases haven't really sped up.

That said, if GW does start releasing products like the rumoured Inquisition game and increases their codexes and supplement pace, they could well find themselves mirroring TSR.

Though it is important to remember that TSR did the flooding in response to drooping sales volume where less units of their core lines were being sold.

Well, I guess there are some similarities.

 Kroothawk wrote:

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:
I'm glad GW have a big, successful business making things in a 1st word country, rather than outsourcing to China, and I was genuinely surprised by the high level of enthusiasm and skills of the people who work for GW.

GW makes so much money they don't know what to do with it, except firing 100 salespersons that is, to lower unemployment

Oh and guess where the printing is done

ewar over at Warseer wrote:I’ve seen a lot of people talk about the growth in the table top wargame market – the anecdotal evidence that we can all see just by opening up the home page of Wayland or Dark Sphere and the huge range of new TT games.

So I thought it would be interesting to see if there was more publically available information on other war games companies. In a 10 minute search I dug out the last 3 years financial statements of Spartan Games (publisher and manufacturer of what I would consider to be some pretty big games: Dystopian Wars, Firestorm Armada etc), Corvus Belli (publisher of Infinity) and Battlefront Miniatures (publisher of Flames of War).

Unfortunately Privateer Press is based in that 3rd world back water () where private companies don’t have to publish financial information, so I don’t have anything on them.

So if you’re interested this is the latest data I could find:


Corvus Belli



Shows some pretty impressive headline growth numbers since 2010 (the 2012 data isn’t publically available yet, which is a shame as I’d be interested to see it). Overall though you can see immediately the difference in scale between the companies – Corvus Belli revenue is circa 0.5% of GW, also remember these are given in USD not GBP, so need to divide by 1.5 to compare.


Rebel Publishing Ltd (trading as Spartan Games)

As for Spartan, they are a bit trickier as they are able to take the small company exemption in the UK from reporting a P&L. However there is a balance sheet which we can use to make a very crude estimate of their turnover. Their debtors balances in 2011-2013 was: £51k, £63k and £54k. If we assume a 45 day cash cycle and average receivable of £55k this translates to approximately £450k turnover.

When you think that GW made £60k just from the sale of the limited edition cover of the recent Lizardmen book, I think that puts things into perspective a little. I’m actually quite surprised, I would have guessed Spartan to be turning over £1m+. I’m less familiar with Infinity but it seems to be very popular at the moment and again that was smaller than I thought.


Battlefront Miniatures



This one is a bit odd – the only information I could find was for their company registered in Malaysia – they also have a number of companies in the UK and NZ but with limited financial data available. The UK subsidiary had receivables of just £40k and zero net assets when I pulled out their March 2012 financial statements. Still, by looking at the Malaysian data is shows they are at least turning over roughly $2m, even if it did decline 17% in 2012.


I’m not personally going to draw too many conclusions from the above but I think this demonstrates just how difficult it must be for miniature wargame companies to turn the success of their games into consistent revenue. I play Firestorm Armada – brilliant game, but now that I and 4 friends have a large fleet each we probably won’t buy anything more for it. They can’t keep up the same relentless release cycle that GW manages which maintains its YOY turnover.

I think the same will apply for the others. People are attacking GW for not growing in the thread about their most recent financials, but honestly from this information it doesn’t seem like the war game market is exactly exploding. Perhaps this indicates that GWs comparative performance isn’t as bad as some are saying? Maybe, maybe not as there still isn’t enough info. However I think it at least sheds a little more light on how everyone else is doing.

TL;DR Spartan is flat, Infinity has grown significantly, Flames of War has shrunk slightly. All of them are only a tiny fraction of GW showing they really are the whale beached in the middle of the pond. Combined estimated turnover of the other 3 companies is roughly 2% of GW – a much smaller fraction than I was expecting in all honesty.

Wolflord Patrick wrote:I heard a few rumors coming out of a source from Games Day that I believe to be worthy of posting and might shed some light on the thread.

1. WH Fantasy sales in the US are down 40% since the release of 8th edition. (Which is sad IMO, because I think that 8th edition is the best edition GW has ever had.)
(...)

Combined estimated turnover of the other 3 companies is roughly 2% of GW – a much smaller fraction than I was expecting in all honesty.

 Scrub wrote:

Combined estimated turnover of the other 3 companies is roughly 2% of GW – a much smaller fraction than I was expecting in all honesty.

Blimey! Interesting post that, Kroothawk, cheers!

I'd really love to see how Privateer Press compare, though.

 azreal13 wrote:

 Scrub wrote:

Combined estimated turnover of the other 3 companies is roughly 2% of GW – a much smaller fraction than I was expecting in all honesty.

Blimey! Interesting post that, Kroothawk, cheers!

I'd really love to see how Privateer Press compare, though.

Agreed, while one can draw some conclusions, without PP's details, nothing really conclusive, my gut says they'd be somewhere in the 10-20% range minimum, but I may as well be speculating on the future price of haddock.

From a market viewpoint I cannot find fault: their stock has tripled since 2010, with approximately a 50% increase annually (going by trend not those strange year end drop/jumps).
(Approximate by graph: 2010 - 250, 2011 - 350, 2012 - 450, 2013 - 660)

Comparing my own portfolio: GW is a good performer so I would not expect any changes from them.

 Alkasyn wrote:
Regarding the numbers posted earlier, Corvus Belli said at Gen Con that they grew an another 75% last year.