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.
2014/08/04 17:50:15
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
gorgon wrote: While you see 'the rules' come up as a common complaint, you'll also see a lot of disagreement about what the problem areas are and how the rulesets could be improved. They'll never make everyone happy, and 40K in particular probably enjoyed its largest growth period under its wonkiest and most patched rulesets (1st-3rd).
IMO, there are many canards that pop up in these discussions, and this is one of them.
The real and current problem with the rules IMO lies in the apparent disconnect between the studio and the rest of the business. Seventh edition 40K is -- even moreso than 6th -- a statement by the studio that 40K is a social game that requires its players to set parameters and generally be mature, agreeable people. You may feel that 40K *should* be this or that, but IMO the studio's stance is a pretty realistic take on what the game has been for most of its history (and again, during some real growth periods).
The problem IMO is that while the studio is busy telling us to forge the narrative, the rest of the business is busy pulling support for and promotion aimed at various communities -- through downsizing to small one-man stores, through less support and friendly policies toward FLGSs, through eliminated or missed opportunities for customer/community interaction, through a lack of tournament support for stores and smaller events, etc.
I like 7th edition a lot. Others feel differently, but my personal read is that a fair chunk of the complaining comes from people who haven't tried or have only barely tried it. IMO, if the 40K communities were healthier, you'd see more players working through the edition change like they've always done in the past. GW has always jerked the player base some around from edition to edition, and 7th is nothing new. What might be different now is that the communities that keep current players engaged and playing -- and introduce new players to the game -- aren't as strong as they used to be.
It could also be that the people that they have put off with 7th edition are not as patient or willing to suffer through the changes of gameplay because of various other factors. If someone is upset about their army changing, or having to spend x amount of dollars on a new unit or what have you, when 7th hits and changes things up a bit again, that may just push them right over the line. They may throw their hands up and say, "Forget it." instead of committing to learning the new edition.
GW hasn't done itself any favors with regard to any community outreach at all. All they do is produce and expect their fans to buy.
Yes, there definitely is something in that. I mean, I never really worked out wound allocation in any edition, and it kept changing. So did LoS and parts of the movement rules, and assault. In fact when you look back, lots of bits of rules changed each edition without much apparent reason for why.
Most of those happened with the change from 5th to 6th, hence the steep decline in the player base that happened in 6th and the consequent scramble by GW to get them back with 7th. Only they didn't do anything to actually please the people that left because of those changes...
Because they had no idea why those people left.
This. If they don't do market research, focus groups or ask the market what it wants, they have zero clue why people are going elsewhere, and all they can do is throw gak at the wall and see what sticks, or keep doing the same thing and hope it works (which is the definition of insanity). Given the pump and dump type of mentality they have towards their customers, I wouldn't be surprised if they just assumed the people leaving are part of that. I did read somewhere that they figured someone would only play the game for a year before they got tired and went elsewhere, so with zero research who's to say if they aren't chalking it up to churn rather than a fundamental issue?
Sadly, maybe you're right. And maybe that is why the release schedule is so accelerated, especially in regard to 7th edition. Maybe they're hoping that a faster release schedule in regard to core rules will translate to a faster churn and more quick revenue. I really don't know what they're thinking, to be honest.
I suspect that faster release pace is to sell more books quickly. There are IDK how many armies and factions in the two games. Most players don't own more than one or two, and GW would like a way to get some money out of everyone every year if possible.
To be fair, we always used to complain about the slow pace of codex releases in 4th/5th. That was because if you were unlucky you might have to wait five, six or up to 10 years for your army to be updated. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that every army should be updated within the first half of the lifetime of a new edition.
However the fast pace of releases has been bad in three ways: 1. The rules aren't any better, just changed faster; 2. It has become obvious that GW are desperate to shove out more books and invalidate things even quicker than before; 3. the doubled price of codexes means the "rent" for keeping up with the game has probably tripled.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 17:52:24
Barfolomew wrote: Here's how I see it. GW claims to be in the market of making models and for some reason, they don't understand that in order to make models, especially ones that have to be painted, people need a reason to buy them. GW IP is not like comics, movies or TV shows where people will buy models to just sit on the self, there has to be a reason at some point.
According to testimony in the CHS suit, GWwants to think of itself as a collectibles company, regardless of the reality of the situation as posted above.
GW should have multiple games that use the same models. This allows them to lower price of production because the same models are used in multiple games. They also allow people to play with the same model, thus the purchaser feels they are getting more value. I would recommend the games be:
- Board game that takes 30 minutes or less and costs $50 or less. Game should support 1 to 4 players. This could be a scenario game based on a ship where players need to defend, escape or assault the ship. Expansions could include rules for other armies and new scenarios.
That was Space Crusade and Advanced Space Crusade
- Small skirmish game that takes 1 hour or less with an intro price of $100 total. This would be Necromunda.
...or 28mm Inquisitor or any number of games they could pull out of the 40K universe.
- Mid level skirmish game that takes 1 hour with intro price of $200. I would see this at about 750 points of 40K.
- Platoon level game that takes about 2 hours with field army price of around $300. 1500 points of 40k.
- Army level game at 3 hours, $500 and about 3000 points of 40K.
2014/08/04 18:21:25
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Alpharius wrote: Don't forget that he also suffers from Murderlust.
Murderfang suffers from Murderlust, and murders his foes with his Murderclaws.
For real.
So, GW is clearly not financially bankrupt, but they might be creatively bankrupt!
GW claims its target demographic is 15-35, but this thing with its murderclaws would only amuse a 12 year old. And even that I'd question as I was playing GW games before that age and am fairly sure I would have thought it childish. Who are they selling to exactly? They seem very confused for people who don't need to do market research.
2014/08/04 18:36:46
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
To be fair, we always used to complain about the slow pace of codex releases in 4th/5th. That was because if you were unlucky you might have to wait five, six or up to 10 years for your army to be updated. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that every army should be updated within the first half of the lifetime of a new edition.
However the fast pace of releases has been bad in three ways: 1. The rules aren't any better, just changed faster; 2. It has become obvious that GW are desperate to shove out more books and invalidate things even quicker than before; 3. the doubled price of codexes means the "rent" for keeping up with the game has probably tripled.
To be fair though that was because they updated things in a very weird way, with some armies (Marines) getting constant releases and updates, and others barely getting anything for months and falling behind. This problem would never exist if GW did updates in the way that PP does; a book every so often that gives an extra kit or three to every faction at once. It's the fact that they always released things slow, and tended to intersperse things that didn't need updates (Marines) with things that did (everything else) that caused the problem.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 18:39:50
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2014/08/04 19:17:53
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Alpharius wrote: Don't forget that he also suffers from Murderlust.
Murderfang suffers from Murderlust, and murders his foes with his Murderclaws.
For real.
So, GW is clearly not financially bankrupt, but they might be creatively bankrupt!
GW claims its target demographic is 15-35, but this thing with its murderclaws would only amuse a 12 year old. And even that I'd question as I was playing GW games before that age and am fairly sure I would have thought it childish. Who are they selling to exactly? They seem very confused for people who don't need to do market research.
I just take it as a joke, actually.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 19:20:37
But in fact I think GW saw 40K as a more productive option. Remember that Specialist Games went the way of the Bitz service during the Mark Wells era, when an awful lot of apparently peripheral stuff was cut in order to cut costs and return the company to profit. It all may not have been a good idea.
Apocryphal story about accounting.
Spoiler:
This is a story that accounting students get told to illustrate the business limitations of accounting.
A man who runs an electrical supplies store calls in an accountant to help him become more profitable.
After analysing the stock and cash flow, the accountant advises the owner to drop cable ties, since they make zero profit, so he does.
Over the next few months his regular customers begin to go elsewhere for their equipment.
Finally he asks one why he doesn't come to the shop any more. The ex-customer says he used to be able to get all the parts and equipment he needed in one place, including cable ties. So now he goes somewhere else.
Obviously it is not an exact parallel to Specialist Games, Worldwide Campaigns, Tournament and Club support, etc. but I think it has relevance.
I've read exact similar story from memoirs of an engineer:
Spoiler:
He went to work in a well-estabilished gunpowder and ammunition manufacturer, which had hit hard times. The accountants had noted that many of the cartridge lines were unprofitable (there were and are many old & rare calibres), so they cut them to save money. Result: sales took even bigger dip and company did only worse. The engineer pointed out to the accountants that most hunters owned multiple guns, and they wanted to buy all the ammo at the same time: they did not want to drive around the town trying to find ammo for their old 8.2*54mm, they wanted to go to straight to the retailer which they knew carried all the calibres they wanted to buy ammo for. Retailers knew this, and did not want to carry a manufacturer with a small selection. So the engineer pushed the company to make more different types, not less, including some types which had become popular but the company had not made previously (at the time, it was Magnum shotgun shells) because it was afraid of investing. Result: in few years, company's sales tripled. Of course the tale had a sad ending, as the new CEO became enthralled with a pet vanity project which ate up all the capital the company had painstakingly built up during its renewal, and the company went under anyway. But that's a different story.
So I am not also suggesting GW's situation is similar, after all, different patients, different strokes. But if nothing else, thin product catalogue carries considerable risks. Certainly, I know more than one manufacturer who were so busy 'cutting costs' and 'superfluous branches' and 'concentrating on core business' that they ran out of things to sell, and no matter how lean their production chain was, they had no cash flow, so they went under.
Regarding the viability of much-talked about skirmish game in GW's current position: obviously nobody is suggesting that a skirmish game alone would sell so much that the company fortunes turn around: in fact, even a successful game likely would sell only a fraction of what 40k brings in. However, the idea is about long term growth potential. Comparison to the past with Mordheim and Necromunda is not viable. Back then, GW games were generally more affordable and getting started costed much less than today. Mordheim was not meant really to draw in new players for WHFB: it was simply something little extra, which the fans of the franchise could play when they were in the mood for something little different, or for those people who didn't want to invest into larger scale wargame.
By contrast, the 'NuHeim' would be designed to work as a standalone game, which would allow people to play meaningful games without obscene amount of miniatures, with compatible miniatures which one could easily adapt as a base for a WHFB army if they wanted. (I'm assuming WHFB here as it needs this kind of 'throw-in' product in a worst way, 40k perhaps less so). The 'NuHeim' would come with
-rules similarities with WHFB, so leap to the 'big league' would be straightforward -around 15-20 miniatures, compatible with WHFB, in fact if GW wants to go real cheap here, they can simply use existing sprues, they have tons of different ones. However, new designs might draw in the veterans as well. -a small painting/hobby guide - in fact they could sell also 'NuHeim paints collection' separately -small but cool looking, pretty background book - GW can do these real well -periodic expansions and dataslates how to convert existing WHFB units and characters to NuHeim (or totally new ones, if we go crazy) -price tag of 60 to 80 euros. Keep it simple, keep it cheap (by GW standards). You don't want to cram in too much stuff or too big miniatures, that will drive the price tag up too much. People will buy more if they're hooked.
With this, GW has -something for the people or parents who wander in the shop and ask "uh, looks cool/my kid really loves these, but do you have like anything bit simpler? Which doesn't cost hundreds of dollars and take year to prepare?" -something for people who like Skirmish games but not large wargames, or can't afford one -something which is easy to give as a Christmas or Birthday present -something which the veterans may be interested in just for curiosity, or if they want the new miniatures (see: Space Hulk) -something which might be even sold in regular toy shops, if GW wants to go that route -...and also something which is potentially easy to advertise in non-GW medium (they don't do that and to a degree I understand why, but with 'one box' product it might be different) -...AND which may later bring in easy licensing income as it should be pretty easy to transform into mobile or computer format
It's not rokkit science, Jethro.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 20:17:06
Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker!
2014/08/04 20:22:56
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Are all generic. There is nothing here that GW can hang their hat on and be willing to spend money on.
No Bloodbowl no Mordheim or other Fantsay based skirmish game will be coming out of GWHQ anytime soon.
Fantasy is likely a thorn in the current boards side, for the reasons outlined above.
Yes, a rational company or leadership would be investing and promoting their other game system. This is GW we are talking about.
And remember, when Kirby goes, you have a company that Kirby has shaped remaining. Any change will occur at the pace of a tanker heading towards an iceberg turning. If at all.
2014/08/04 21:08:36
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Mr. Burning wrote: And remember, when Kirby goes, you have a company that Kirby has shaped remaining. Any change will occur at the pace of a tanker heading towards an iceberg turning. If at all.
With a crew only trained to say "Yes sir!", not to actually do anything involved with operating a ship.
2014/08/04 21:13:56
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Mr. Burning wrote: I think it bears repeating that the Warhammer fantasy universe has very little unique and defensible content.
Fantasy actually has an interesting & deep set of world-myth associated with it (which is why they've gone through so many iterations of the WHRPG over the years); Mordheim in particular is a very interesting setting. And Skaven, as implemented in the setting, are a fantastically interesting race.
Lots of stories have started with generic elements & taken them to interesting (and copyrightable) places.
Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
2014/08/04 21:39:40
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Are all generic. There is nothing here that GW can hang their hat on and be willing to spend money on.
Just because something is not completely indigenous and unique does not mean one can't make money with it. If Vampires weren't profitable, Twilight movies wouldn't exist.
As anal as GW are about their IP, they are not going to abandon an entire universe just because some parts of it are very generic (a common feature with practically any post-Tolkien fantasy world).
Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker!
2014/08/04 21:43:09
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
The danger for GW is that it is so easy to find historical or fantasy substitutes for most of the figures needed for most of the Fantasy armies that they possibly only make a lot of money off the large model kits (corpse chariots, and the like) and the more unusual factions of Skaven and Lizardmen.
The same is becoming true for 40K, which perhaps helps explain the recent drive to introduce new and larger types of models into the game.
Just speculation on my part of course.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 21:45:37
Kilkrazy wrote: The danger for GW is that it is so easy to find historical or fantasy substitutes for most of the figures needed for most of the Fantasy armies that they possibly only make a lot of money off the large model kits (corpse chariots, and the like) and the more unusual factions of Skaven and Lizardmen.
The same is becoming true for 40K, which perhaps helps explain the recent drive to introduce new and larger types of models into the game.
Just speculation on my part of course.
Astute! Oooh, that makes a lot of sense.
It is very easy to find stuff to replace most infantry-sized miniatures, but finding something that is appropriate for replacing an Imperial Knight or other biggie-model is much more difficult. I've noticed that.
2014/08/04 21:54:00
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
If Fantasy was retired, I wonder whether it would actually be announced, or if model kits would start just disappearing, Specialist Games style (and it would just stop being mentioned in whatever the magazine is now that mentions stuff).
“Good people are quick to help others in need, without hesitation or requiring proof the need is genuine. The wicked will believe they are fighting for good, but when others are in need they’ll be reluctant to help, withholding compassion until they see proof of that need. And yet Evil is quick to condemn, vilify and attack. For Evil, proof isn’t needed to bring harm, only hatred and a belief in the cause.”
2014/08/04 22:05:08
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
It is difficult to believe that Fantasy would be retired, however if done I think people would quickly notice whichever way they might do it.
One of the points Kirby made was that they aim to create new sales out of their existing IP, which of course is only Fantasy and 40K. They can hardly do that by retiring one of them even if it is the smaller selling and possibly shrinking.
[DCM]
GW Public Relations Manager (Privateer Press Mole)
Wasn't there a story floating around--that then head of North American GW--was fighting to keep the Warhammer Fantasy brand alive, as the main office was debating about dropping down to a single product (40k)?
Adepticon TT 2009---Best Heretical Force
Adepticon 2010---Best Appearance Warhammer Fantasy Warbands
Adepticon 2011---Best Team Display
2014/08/04 22:09:43
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Kilkrazy wrote: The danger for GW is that it is so easy to find historical or fantasy substitutes for most of the figures needed for most of the Fantasy armies that they possibly only make a lot of money off the large model kits (corpse chariots, and the like) and the more unusual factions of Skaven and Lizardmen.
And Tomb Kings, Wood Elves (at least the non-elves), & Ogres. Chaos, as always, is a mixed bag - some of GW's imagery is fairly unique (Slaaneshi daemons in particular), but people have gotten to the point where they accept a lot of proxy-daemons for aesthetic reasons.
It would have been nice if GW had actually allowed their history to advance, though. In both 40k & Fantasy, they had world-wide campaigns to allow for major plot advancement...and then chickened out instead of actually moving the clock forward.
Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
2014/08/04 22:15:18
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
[DCM]
GW Public Relations Manager (Privateer Press Mole)
Backfire wrote: I'd think it would be other way around: it seems that in the USA Fantasy is doing particularly poorly.
I believe that was the reason GW Main wanted to drop the line--due to poor product movement. The Northern GW offices were arguing that while Fantasy was selling poorly, they would not be diversified enough banking on one product. Unless I'm misunderstanding your post.
Adepticon TT 2009---Best Heretical Force
Adepticon 2010---Best Appearance Warhammer Fantasy Warbands
Adepticon 2011---Best Team Display
2014/08/04 22:33:45
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Backfire wrote: I'd think it would be other way around: it seems that in the USA Fantasy is doing particularly poorly.
I believe that was the reason GW Main wanted to drop the line--due to poor product movement. The Northern GW offices were arguing that while Fantasy was selling poorly, they would not be diversified enough banking on one product. Unless I'm misunderstanding your post.
I think if they were to drop Fantasy, that they'd herald death even faster. Of course if I were say Ronnie Renton (CEO of Mantic) I'd love for such a thing as the closest competitor to Fantasy is Kings of War.
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2014/08/04 23:07:04
Subject: Re:GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
I've mentioned this already ITT, but it came up again while talking with some meat sack friends earlier this evening and as it seemed to go largely unnoticed, I'll mention it again.
Mark Wells was paid 500k "for loss of office."
Now this is a dialect of corporate double-speak I'm not so well versed in, but is this essentially compensation for getting the boot? If so, the implications of that, and Kirby subsequently taking over, could be quite significant. Especially considering he departed in Jan 2013.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 23:07:34
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: I've mentioned this already ITT, but it came up again while talking with some meat sack friends earlier this evening and as it seemed to go largely unnoticed, I'll mention it again.
Mark Wells was paid 500k "for loss of office."
Now this is a dialect of corporate double-speak I'm not so well versed in, but is this essentially compensation for getting the boot? If so, the implications of that, and Kirby subsequently taking over, could be quite significant. Especially considering he departed in Jan 2013.
Loss of office would be severance. It's the golden parachute. Most places it's usually 1 year of base salary as a CEO because it's harder for them to find a comparable position. In the US, this kind of information is disclosed via S-8 and within the foot notes of the statements because they are on either the BoD or are a C level executive. They should also be including any stock options he receives as well. Didn't he terminate during FY14? This isn't from FY13 right?
Unless you're the CEO of JC Penny, you probably won't be getting your job back as CEO. Most serve on Boards until they can get another shot.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/05 00:16:21
[/sarcasm]
2014/08/05 00:09:05
Subject: Re:GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
So you concur this is evidence he didn't leave voluntarily?
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
When you leave a position, you terminate. How you terminate is another story. Most don't leave unless they retire. He may have been fired, he may have quit. Who knows what is true. IIRC, he left prior to the poor results and after he left, the poor performance wasn't tied to him. Hey may have seen the writing on the wall and jumped prior to it or he may have just been an early part of the reduction in force that GW had during the year.
[/sarcasm]
2014/08/05 00:21:55
Subject: GW Annual Report is Up -- Report discussion starts on pg 12
Its hard to blame Wells for much as Kirby seems to always be pulling the strings, and he will do so with the next CEO as well.
Don't forget, TK is only stepping down as CEO he will still hold the Chair.
Thats how I've been taking it anyhow.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/05 00:26:29
Armies: Space Marines, IG, Tyranids, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar.
I am the best 40k player in my town, I always win! Of course, I am the only player of 40k in my town.
boyd wrote: When you leave a position, you terminate. How you terminate is another story. Most don't leave unless they retire. He may have been fired, he may have quit. Who knows what is true. IIRC, he left prior to the poor results and after he left, the poor performance wasn't tied to him. Hey may have seen the writing on the wall and jumped prior to it or he may have just been an early part of the reduction in force that GW had during the year.
You don't get half a million quid for choosing to leave as a rule. That it was paid, and so much time after the event, suggests this could be compensation for dismissal, it may even be the result of a tribunal, which would explain the delay.
Its hard to blame Wells for much as Kirby seems to always be pulling the strings, and he will do so with the next CEO as well.
Don't forget, TK is only stepping down as CEO he will still hold the Chair.
Thats how I've been taking it anyhow.
I'm not trying to attach any blame to Wells, quite the opposite.
There is a story here that can fit the information as given that Kirby got rid of Wells because he thought he could do as good a job and save a bit on the salary, but subsequently has had to pay compensation to Wells, possibly due to unfair or constructive dismissal, and has managed to steer the GW plane so it is pointing firmly at the ground.
Not saying it is the right interpretation, or the only one, but it is possible.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/05 00:47:23
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Are all generic. There is nothing here that GW can hang their hat on and be willing to spend money on...
Yes, a rational company or leadership would be investing and promoting their other game system. This is GW we are talking about.
Kilkrazy wrote:The danger for GW is that it is so easy to find historical or fantasy substitutes for most of the figures needed for most of the Fantasy armies that they possibly only make a lot of money off the large model kits (corpse chariots, and the like) and the more unusual factions of Skaven and Lizardmen.
Even if Warhammer is generic post-Tolkien fantasy with a wee bit of warhammery seasoning, and they don't see much hope in that, I still think they're missing a trick. I wouldn't mind seeing them release a fantasy skirmish game with a low cost of entry, but there are three things that've been said many times before:
1. Everyone and their granny has a skirmish game out these days. GW dropped the ball on that and even with Warhammer mechanics being used for a much more appropriate size of game, it'll be hard to get back into that market.
They should be taking advantage of 2. the generally high quality of their minis and 3. their economies of scale and cheap post-tooling plastic manufacture (and what's left of their ubiquity and infrastructure) to do just what they have done and are struggling to do now: sell armies. Only with the aim to sell as cheaply, or cheaper than their most relevant competitors in that areas, and at a price point that at least doesn't seem as unreasonable as it does now, compared to a skirmish gang. They'd perform a reverse-Mantic and appeal to players of other systems, not just to Warhammer players for Warhammer. Then the generic themes would be an advantage!
I.e. Hasslefree, Corvus Belli, Red Box et al sell better-quality, metal, individual minis and characters for fantasy and sci-fi, but they ain't cheap per mini. You're not going to build an army for mass battle gaming with them, at least not anytime soon. The other, most comparable army-sellers include the Perrys and Warlord etc. with their plastic historicals, which are a great price for pretty good minis (and I agree, I'd much rather build a Warhammer Empire or Bretonnia army with Perry inf + cav) but you're not likely to see many orcs and elves coming from them anytime soon. For fantasy, you've got the likes of WF's plastic orcs and AoW's dwarfs among others, and Mantic. Limited, iffy ranges for the first lot and a... borked range, for the latter.
Talk about dropping the ball... It's frustratingly ironic that the two biggest choices are the generally good quality and terrible prices of GW, or the great prices and generally funky quality of Mantic. And I would much rather build an army with GW's high elves, skaven, or beastmen, than Mantic's elves, Black Tree Design's vermen, or Foundry's blood gorged on the one hand*; or Tre Manor's metal elves on the other. They'd be the best compromise or balance between quality+style and cheap production - if only the retail cost wasn't so money-grubbing!
*There's another one like Mantic: the God of Battles rules look good, but IMO it was a mistake to bulk it way out with big pics and painting guides, 'cos it only made me weep at how dreadful Foundry's fantasy minis are.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/05 00:50:53
boyd wrote: When you leave a position, you terminate. How you terminate is another story. Most don't leave unless they retire. He may have been fired, he may have quit. Who knows what is true. IIRC, he left prior to the poor results and after he left, the poor performance wasn't tied to him. Hey may have seen the writing on the wall and jumped prior to it or he may have just been an early part of the reduction in force that GW had during the year.
You don't get half a million quid for choosing to leave as a rule. That it was paid, and so much time after the event, suggests this could be compensation for dismissal, it may even be the result of a tribunal, which would explain the delay.
Its hard to blame Wells for much as Kirby seems to always be pulling the strings, and he will do so with the next CEO as well.
Don't forget, TK is only stepping down as CEO he will still hold the Chair.
Thats how I've been taking it anyhow.
I'm not trying to attach any blame to Wells, quite the opposite.
There is a story here that can fit the information as given that Kirby got rid of Wells because he thought he could do as good a job and save a bit on the salary, but subsequently has had to pay compensation to Wells, possibly due to unfair or constructive dismissal, and has managed to steer the GW plane so it is pointing firmly at the ground.
Not saying it is the right interpretation, or the only one, but it is possible.
Oh I wasn't saying you were attaching blame, I was just saying Wells can't be held to too much account of what was likely a result of Kirby's cajoling. I'm sure Wells will do better elsewhere and look at this report and just shake his head..
If I were suddenly appointed CEO of GW, and TK were Chair, I think that the first thing I would do is hog-tie him and duct tape his mouth shut, then start asking questions to get to the root of the GW culture.
Are we a manufacturer or a retailer?
Why don't we advertise?
Who is buying our product?
What do they do with it?
Where is our biggest customer (geographically)
How can we maximize production and minimize cost?
How do we sell more?
Will lower prices increase sales.
When do we release new products?
What do we need to do to retain and regain veteran customers?
Who do we need to support in the way of officially sanctioned events and conventions?
Why are we trying to do all the heavy lifting?
How do we get people excited about our product?
And so on, so forth etc. ad nauseum. Blah, blah, blah
It seems as though TK is the type of fellow to have a quick, know-it-all answer for every situation and yet he knows nothing at all. His many statements over the years show he doesn't think that far ahead and is making gak up when it comes to those questions.
Armies: Space Marines, IG, Tyranids, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar.
I am the best 40k player in my town, I always win! Of course, I am the only player of 40k in my town.
Right, of course much of their LotR sales were piggybacked on the free sprues on the D'Agostini magazines.
The Hobbit had no such placements.
History.
Armies: Space Marines, IG, Tyranids, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar.
I am the best 40k player in my town, I always win! Of course, I am the only player of 40k in my town.
