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.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Wayshuba wrote:


And this is their biggest problem! They have only two effective products now - WHFB and WH40k. If the public does indeed lose interest in one of those product families, most specifically 40k, GW will go down very fast. This is why most 30 year old companies DIVERSIFY product ranges. GW, on the other hand, has done the exact opposite - and it leaves them in a very precarious situation if the gaming public does lose interest, en mass, in one of their titles now.

I don't know about some of you, but I would make it rain at GW if BFG and/or Epic were released with all new plastics.

I would seriously consider a heavy investment in both, I have to agree.

Sadly, however, we'll be looking at £1 or so per 5-model-stand in Epic, at a conservative estimate, and GW will probably play their current rule set shenanigans with that system too.

At the moment, even if GW did a U-turn on how they deal with their product ranges, I'd want to see some real change in how they treat their customers before I put my money where my dice live, in regards to GW.

As a retail store owner I can say for sure that GW is not dying any time soon. My inside numbers concerning everything they sell (expect for Dreadfleet and some of their books like Sigmar's Blood) are ridiculously high. However, I think GW is going to have to step up there game. With Infinity, warmachine/hordes/ malifaux and kick-starter successes like Relic Knights coming up to the plate, they are going to have some hard years ahead.

They continue to practice very dated business strategies (such as no store being allowed to GW products if they are within 10miles of each other) and continue to raise prices to ridiculous levels.

I think what we are seeing from GW right now are small attempts to change, but unless they do something significant they are easily going to drop from the top seller... to maybe 5th place.

 Generalian wrote:
As a retail store owner I can say for sure that GW is not dying any time soon. My inside numbers concerning everything they sell (expect for Dreadfleet and some of their books like Sigmar's Blood) are ridiculously high. However, I think GW is going to have to step up there game. With Infinity, warmachine/hordes/ malifaux and kick-starter successes like Relic Knights coming up to the plate, they are going to have some hard years ahead.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to raise a skeptical eyebrow at you.

As the former owner of a (non hobby) store, I seriously doubt that any internal sales info you're privy to is in any way the whole picture, and will most likely be a constructed image in order to reassure you/encourage you to buy more.

In addition, how can you know they're ridiculously high if you have nothing to compare it to? (If you do have sales figures for other companies product outside of just your store, that would be interesting reading) If I tell you I sold 1000 widgets last week, without context, how can you tel, if that's a record week or an unmitigated disaster?

 Azreal13 wrote:
If I tell you I sold 1000 widgets last week, without context, how can you tel, if that's a record week or an unmitigated disaster?

Given that the number is not in the tens, hundreds or thousands of thousands (10,000 - 1,000,000), it kinda hints at the latter, unless it's a particularly high value item.
Aside from that, I concur.

 Selym wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
If I tell you I sold 1000 widgets last week, without context, how can you tel, if that's a record week or an unmitigated disaster?

Given that the number is not in the tens, hundreds or thousands of thousands (10,000 - 1,000,000), it kinda hints at the latter, unless it's a particularly high value item.
Aside from that, I concur.

His particular widget might be £80,000 jet bikes. Then weekly sales of 1,000 units might be decidedly impressive. His point being - context.

My point exactly.

Substitute "widgets" for "Ferraris" and you have a very different mental picture than "tins of beans."

But then, without further context, 1000 x tins of beans may be considered a good weeks trading, depending on the scenario.

 Azreal13 wrote:
My point exactly.

Substitute "widgets" for "Ferraris" and you have a very different mental picture than "tins of beans."

But then, without further context, 1000 x tins of beans may be considered a good weeks trading, depending on the scenario.

Such as trading "magic" beans for Cows.

If GW won't allow FLGS within 10 miles of a GW store to carry the product, it certainly isn't being enforced in my area. I have a comic shop 1 mile from my house that stocks tons of 40k stuff. There is a GW 1/4 mile from me the other way on the same street. By my math, the stores are about 1.5 miles from each other. The GW store still manages to be highly successful (monthly average sales have gone up 110% in the past year).

 Selym wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Wayshuba wrote:


And this is their biggest problem! They have only two effective products now - WHFB and WH40k. If the public does indeed lose interest in one of those product families, most specifically 40k, GW will go down very fast. This is why most 30 year old companies DIVERSIFY product ranges. GW, on the other hand, has done the exact opposite - and it leaves them in a very precarious situation if the gaming public does lose interest, en mass, in one of their titles now.

I don't know about some of you, but I would make it rain at GW if BFG and/or Epic were released with all new plastics.

I would seriously consider a heavy investment in both, I have to agree.

Sadly, however, we'll be looking at £1 or so per 5-model-stand in Epic, at a conservative estimate, and GW will probably play their current rule set shenanigans with that system too.

At the moment, even if GW did a U-turn on how they deal with their product ranges, I'd want to see some real change in how they treat their customers before I put my money where my dice live, in regards to GW.

From what I have heard from all (4) GW managers from different stores I've asked they all seem to think that all of the necromunda, epic, ect games are going to be re-released in the next year or two. I know that it's not like the necessarily have TOO much more inside knowledge than the rest of us but I would've thought that they'd have SOME insight into it.

 thetallestgiraffe wrote:
From what I have heard from all (4) GW managers from different stores I've asked they all seem to think that all of the necromunda, epic, ect games are going to be re-released in the next year or two. I know that it's not like the necessarily have TOO much more inside knowledge than the rest of us but I would've thought that they'd have SOME insight into it.

Just in time to save the next half-yearly report, no doubt.

It would make sense for them to do something like that. Lots of people still play 40k but have decided their existing armies are good enough and rarely add anything to them. Releasing a new game or re-releasing an old one would bring lots of new revenue. However, it's also going to cost more than just making a couple new models for an existing faction of an existing game. Hopefully if they do that, they won't price everything so astronomically high that it keeps people from picking up the new game. Without any advertising or social media presence, it will be difficult to get enough new players to be profitable. Most of their customers will be people who already play 40k. At that point they aren't getting new revenue, people are just spending their monthly 40k budget on a different GW product that costs the company more to produce and most likely has a lower margin.

Considering how well regarded some of those games are, and the popularity with veterans, it could be a very good move to bring them back in new, revised editions with new models.

It would also give GW some different lines to put in their shops which I think is an excellent idea.

The downsides are that it isn't very innovative, and presumably a lot of vets already have old editions and models they are happy with.

The re-issued games might do well with new recruits, though.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 thetallestgiraffe wrote:
From what I have heard from all (4) GW managers from different stores I've asked they all seem to think that all of the necromunda, epic, ect games are going to be re-released in the next year or two. I know that it's not like the necessarily have TOO much more inside knowledge than the rest of us but I would've thought that they'd have SOME insight into it.

Just in time to save the next half-yearly report, no doubt.

I wonder if it will this time. They have some serious competition in that space now. In addition, GW will probably do it like they did third edition Space Hulk. A quick, limited run to gain some quick cash. For GW veterans, considering the support GW has given SGs over the last decade, will they really want to jump on the bandwagon of something they know GW is not going to support?

Space Hulk succeeded because the original version went OOP a long time ago, the game had massive heritage, and the production values of the new edition were extremely good.

I wouldn't buy a limited run, box set for BFG/Epic. If they want my money, it'd be a full blown game again with rules support, plastic spaceships, and other goodies.

Then again, I currently don't have a lot of faith they'd make the rules any better than the player done 2010 FAQ for BFG, not to mention other clean rulesets for spaceships like FSA.

I do love the BFG models though. Easily my favourite all around line up of models. FSA is pretty close now though with their redone lines.

Toofast wrote:Releasing a new game or re-releasing an old one would bring lots of new revenue.

Kilkrazy wrote:Considering how well regarded some of those games are, and the popularity with veterans, it could be a very good move to bring them back in new, revised editions with new models.
The re-issued games might do well with new recruits, though.

Considering the SGs were canned last time because they either didn't sell (I'm guessing because they weren't 40K, i.e, winning didn't depend on the biggest gun you could buy), or sell well enough, or apparently cannibalised sales from 40K; colour me sceptical.

If GW do re-release them within a year, I'll take that as a supremely desperate move and evidence that they are going under.

Answer to original question: Not sure if they're going under, but I don't get emotionally invested like some people do. If they did, or they priced me out of the hobby, I'd move along but still enjoy painting my old models and grabbing games.

 Blacksails wrote:
I wouldn't buy a limited run, box set for BFG/Epic. If they want my money, it'd be a full blown game again with rules support, plastic spaceships, and other goodies.

Then again, I currently don't have a lot of faith they'd make the rules any better than the player done 2010 FAQ for BFG, not to mention other clean rulesets for spaceships like FSA.

I do love the BFG models though. Easily my favourite all around line up of models. FSA is pretty close now though with their redone lines.

Have you tried Firestorm Armada? I want to, but just curious if this scratches the BFG itch.

Epic 40k seems like that's the game I want to play, large battles but without a massive price tag on 28mm scale Epic.

I for one don't see this happening some time soon.

they are big, they got loads of money saved and owe pretty much zero - unless they deliberately on purpose employ morons to just drive GW down to the soil I think they are safe and the loss of profits are just the signs of a rocky recession/economy it will soon fade out.

Point is too many lovers of their gak will keep it a float even though we all b*tch about their costs etc

 kerikhaos wrote:
I for one don't see this happening some time soon.

they are big, they got loads of money saved and owe pretty much zero - unless they deliberately on purpose employ morons to just drive GW down to the soil I think they are safe and the loss of profits are just the signs of a rocky recession/economy it will soon fade out.

Point is too many lovers of their gak will keep it a float even though we all b*tch about their costs etc

Except that despite the wider economy the tabletop games market has been growing by 10 or 15% every year for several years now. That's the truly worrying part as it means GWs problems can't be handwaved away by the economy, they are remaining stagnate (untill the last report which showed them shrinking drastically) in a market that's experiencing a golden age of growth.

Another factor to bare in mind come the report - at time of writing the UK has record, or near record, levels of employment (while paying due deference to that number featuring record numbers of part time and 0 hour contracts) and it was announced this week that the UK economy has recovered to pre crisis levels.

For those of you wondering what will be contained in this week's financial report, here's a spoiler:

http://investor.games-workshop.com/2014/07/07/director-shareholding-3/

The COO is buying additional stock.

I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, probably a good thing ?

Hollismason wrote:
I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, probably a good thing ?

Good for GW right now, since it suggests confidence in a share price increase in the immediate future (since if you expect share price to drop after a bad report you'd wait until after the report to buy). Whether it's good for GW in the long run depends on why the financial report is expected to be good. If they showed an increase in profits only because of cost cutting and the 7th edition sales spike then it's probably just a sign of an investor looking to make a short-term profit and doesn't promise any long-term success.

Also note that this is a very minor shareholder making a small purchase compared to the number of shares they already hold, so it's quite likely that it's just a case of making a regularly-scheduled purchase based on their current investment plan and/or employee benefits. GW is just legally required to report these events, regardless of how significant they are.

Doesn't mean anything for two reasons, 1) it was a small number of shares and 2) it was part of the automatic dividend reinvestment program.

I think it's actually illegal to not report it and or actually not do that or something.

More telling is that roundtree seems to be the only one participating in dividend reinvestment...

 TheKbob wrote:

Have you tried Firestorm Armada? I want to, but just curious if this scratches the BFG itch.

Epic 40k seems like that's the game I want to play, large battles but without a massive price tag on 28mm scale Epic.

I haven't personally but I didn't particularly like Uncharted Seas which apparently has very similar rules. Epic does have excellent rules but its virtually impossible to actually find a game, Dropzone Commander looks like it will be an excellent alternative in terms of scale, popularity and quality. Hawk Games (who make DZC) are in the process of writing a space combat game in conjunction with Andy Chambers, its just possible that it will be an excellent substitute for BFG.

My problem with GW re-releasing 'specialist games' is that they will undoubtedly be limited editions (and therefore all but useless) and that GW will probably ruin the rules. GW was foolish to let SGs wither but I no longer trust GW to do them justice.

Epic does have excellent rules but its virtually impossible to actually find a game

Do you have any armies for it? Can you run demos?

 techsoldaten wrote:
For those of you wondering what will be contained in this week's financial report, here's a spoiler:

http://investor.games-workshop.com/2014/07/07/director-shareholding-3/

The COO is buying additional stock.

That really doesn't mean anything. I once worked for a company that knew the reporting was going to be bad so the senior officers of the company decided to purchase stock to show their "confidence" in the company just prior to the reporting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kerikhaos wrote:


they are big, they got loads of money saved and owe pretty much zero -

I don't understand where people keep thinking this. As of last reporting session they had £9.2m cash. That is not a lot considering they have £36.7m in fixed expenses per period (in addition to 28% in variable sale expense). So basically, they have 1.5 months of cash on hand should things downturn quickly.