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.

http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2014/07/31/tinbane-on-analyzing-gws-sales-figures-a-40k-players-guide/

Great read... of course I'm sure someone posted this somewhere already, but I couldn't find it via the search function or skimming GD... apologies if I'm reposting.

Much more interesting than most pseudointellectual things I've read about why GW cares about money rather than it's customer.

Thanks for posting!

He takes optimism to a whole new level. He keeps talking about one time investments effecting profit while doing his best to willfully ignore the fact that they lost 8.2% in revenue and had their worst sales year ever at a time when prices are the highest and they put out the most new releases.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also your thread title made me lol. I thought you were going to link an article on the onion when I read that as by every measure possible, GW had their worst financial year ever and doesn't even know why or how to turn it around.

I don't see how his article is saying that GW is doing really well financially.

He acknowledges that the website upgrade appears to be a financial waste.
He acknowledges that total revenue dropped, and that the release of several popular factions didn't result in growth.
He specifically discusses Kirby's inability to understand that people don't just buy GW miniatures for the sake of having them.

While he talks about GW getting better returns on their sales, he also admits that the changes in gross revenue (if continued) will be bad for GW.

His hopes for the future are GW now shifting their strategies away from what they have been doing:
general reduction in prices
discounts on big boxes
incentives to buy from the website such as limited edition models through a points redemption system.
moving to a focus on growth through attracting people to the system.

He's not wrong. But he's fundamentally saying what a lot of people are saying. GW continuing on the trajectory that they are on bodes poorly for the company. His article is setting out how GW isn't in an inevitable death spiral, but is at a point where CHANGES in the GW business model can be positive.

I hope that he's right, but I'm less optimistic than he is about the possibility of GW rolling out price reductions to grow the business.

(And I pray that he's wrong about limited edition models and points redemption systems. I HATE being forced to jump through hoops to buy stuff from a company. GW got rid of the Skullz program years ago, and I'm glad they did (Don't get me wrong. I loved the models, but why not just let us buy them when you make them?). I know that he believes that those types of incentives will encourage people to buy from GW directly, when I think that limited edition shenanigans just discourage new players, who discover that they've already missed their chance to get a cool model, by virtue of being born too late).

If I tell you that this is the last exit for your destination, and you need to slow down and get over into the right lane or you'll miss it and never get there, I'm not saying that your current navigation is going really well. I'm saying that you've got one last opportunity not to feth it all up and spoil your vacation.

An article written by someone who may have the slightest glimmer of what goes on at GW that will be dissected by a bunch of GW haters with no idea what's going on at GW. Oh joy!!

Solis Luna Astrum wrote:
An article written by someone who may have the slightest glimmer of what goes on at GW that will be dissected by a bunch of GW haters with no idea what's going on at GW. Oh joy!!

Are you implying that the financial report that clearly and concisely states exactly what has been going at GW for the past fiscal year doesn't indicate what has been going on at GW for the past fiscal year?

Some of the article is correct. GW have got rid of a lot of costs. They have been doing that every year for about six years and that is why their profitability increased.

However you can only profit from sales. GW's danger is the reduction of sales. The article kind of mentions this and says that GW management don't understand why people buy (or don't buy) GW products and therefore have little idea about how to sell more. But if they did sell more they would be very profitable.

The problem is what happens if they sell less.

Solis Luna Astrum wrote:
An article written by someone who may have the slightest glimmer of what goes on at GW that will be dissected by a bunch of GW haters with no idea what's going on at GW. Oh joy!!

Nope, no clue. I'm just too dull to read their public financial numbers for the last 10 years and the preambles that accompany them which tell me exactly what's going on at GW. Slashing costs to the point where they're losing revenue because of it, willfully ignoring their customer's wants, pretending competition doesn't exist, etc. But go ahead and keep pretending that what GW does is a giant mystery to us simpletons. Profit down 42%, revenue down 8.2%, lowest sales since they went public with their Financials during the year with the fastest release schedule and highest prices. It doesn't take a rocket scientist or fortune 500 CEO to figure out that is a bad thing and doesn't leave much time to turn it around.

Solis Luna Astrum wrote:
An article written by someone who may have the slightest glimmer of what goes on at GW that will be dissected by a bunch of GW haters with no idea what's going on at GW. Oh joy!!

You do realise that GW is a publicly traded company who releases their figures annually and the last one showed reduced figures and was led by a preamble from the CEO which was very unprofessionally written and gave little to think GW is in a good position at the moment?

Or am I just hating now?

Good article, though I expect "the horde" will be along soon though so I shalln't bother getting into any discussion about it.

It's best not to look for sources that agree with how you want things to be, but to look at the actual data for yourself.

KommissarKarl wrote:
I expect "the crowd" will be along soon though so I shalln't bother getting into any discussion about it.

Yeah, that annoying crowd that comes along and doesn't add anything to the discussion but rather just puts down the opinions of other people, ignoring valid discussion in favour of dismissive labels like... oh wait, never mind.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
I expect "the crowd" will be along soon though so I shalln't bother getting into any discussion about it.

Yeah, that annoying crowd that comes along and doesn't add anything to the discussion but rather just puts down the opinions of other people, ignoring valid discussion in favour of dismissive labels like... oh wait, never mind.

Oh I don't think any meaningful discussion will happen in this thread

KommissarKarl wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
I expect "the crowd" will be along soon though so I shalln't bother getting into any discussion about it.

Yeah, that annoying crowd that comes along and doesn't add anything to the discussion but rather just puts down the opinions of other people, ignoring valid discussion in favour of dismissive labels like... oh wait, never mind.

Oh I don't think any meaningful discussion will happen in this thread

Not if people keep posting in it like you are, it won't.

 Sidstyler wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

KommissarKarl wrote:
I expect "the crowd" will be along soon though so I shalln't bother getting into any discussion about it.

Yeah, that annoying crowd that comes along and doesn't add anything to the discussion but rather just puts down the opinions of other people, ignoring valid discussion in favour of dismissive labels like... oh wait, never mind.

Oh I don't think any meaningful discussion will happen in this thread

Not if people keep posting in it like you are, it won't.

Well if people keep replying to me, I'll keep replying to them it's only polite.

Toofast wrote:
He takes optimism to a whole new level. He keeps talking about one time investments effecting profit while doing his best to willfully ignore the fact that they lost 8.2% in revenue and had their worst sales year ever at a time when prices are the highest and they put out the most new releases.
Also your thread title made me lol. I thought you were going to link an article on the onion when I read that as by every measure possible, GW had their worst financial year ever and doesn't even know why or how to turn it around.

*double take*
Are you changing sides? ; p The title *is* hilarious.

Just for a change, could we try sticking to the topic rather than making snide cracks at people with opinions that differ from our own?


Just for a little while?

 frozenwastes wrote:
It's best not to look for sources that agree with how you want things to be, but to look at the actual data for yourself.

I don't think so. Naked data say nothing. Interpretation of data in terms of the actual context is key.
There are a few guys here able to do this. Me not included.

 insaniak wrote:
Just for a change, could we try sticking to the topic rather than making snide cracks at people with opinions that differ from our own?


Just for a little while?

...no.

I don't think it's a bad article, really. I think the OP is mistaken if they take TinBane's optimistic outlook as a sign that GW is doing "really well financially", though. He doesn't think they're caught up in a death spiral yet like a lot of people do, but he did seem to be of a mind that continuing on as they have is going to be a very bad idea, which I think is a pretty realistic view. They're not doing good, but they're not that bad yet.

I'm kind of interested in seeing what a new CEO will do for them, but Kirby's continued presence on the board doesn't give me very high hopes.

 wuestenfux wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:
It's best not to look for sources that agree with how you want things to be, but to look at the actual data for yourself.

I don't think so. Naked data say nothing. Interpretation of data in terms of the actual context is key.
There are a few guys here able to do this. Me not included.

It's not that complicated.


New releases for nine factions (incl. Inquisition, Knights, Eldars, Tyranids, Imperial Guard, Marines)
+
Release of two major cash cows: Space Marines and new edition of the main core game
+
Release of six codex supplements (incl. Farshight and Iyanden)
+
Price increases all over these ranges
=
Loses money (revenue, actually, but you get the point)

I don' write great articles, and it may be just me, but... I don't find the result to be that great.

Forgive me, as I'm one of "the hordes" (Lok'tar Ogar! Wait wrong Horde) but some immediate thoughts:

1) Doesn't Frontline Gaming sell GW miniatures and sponsor (?) 40k tournaments? If so isn't that a bit biased then? It would be like saying that everything GW produces is gold because BOLS writes an article saying how great it is and how we should all go and buy it. I suspect some ulterior motive in the article, although I admit it's actually well written.

2) What is the author's business credentials? I ask this one because we have several current or former managers/directors/CEOs here and on other forums (Azrael13, Wayshuba and Reinholt spring to mind immediately, to say nothing of the guy on MasterMinis, who given his past *really* knows his stuff) saying the opposite. While one can dismiss the above people as "haters" or whatever the term du jour is, they have background and knowledge to analyze these things, so for comparison I'd like to know what the author of that piece's qualifications are.

IIRC the previous report sales were down 32%, and this report they went down to 42%; so that's about a 10% decrease in sales over what, 6 months (maybe a bit longer)? In what way, shape or form can that be good for any business, especially in light of the releases that GW put out.

Solis Luna Astrum wrote:
An article written by someone who may have the slightest glimmer of what goes on at GW that will be dissected by a bunch of GW haters with no idea what's going on at GW. Oh joy!!

So I guess the raw numbers are "haters" as well?

KommissarKarl wrote:
Good article, though I expect "the horde" will be along soon though so I shalln't bother getting into any discussion about it.

Yeah. Curse that horde and their publicly released and certified numbers! Just a bunch of haters!!!

Also, to counter the OP I present this:

http://www.macroaxis.com/invest/ratio/GAW.L--Probability_Of_Bankruptcy

This seems to be an investment firm's website. Now, I don't know how this is calculated (might just be some kind of algorithm based on the stocks), but this gives a 71% chance of "financial distress" within the next 2 years.

Take it as you will, I don't deal with stocks so I have no idea how to read the information presented on that site, or if it's grounded in anything but a single firm's viewpoint of the situation for use in handling clients. Maybe one of our in the know people can offer their view whether the above site can be taken as valid?

I am not sure I would characterize that article as great, given his lack of discussion of the actual mechanics of what is going on.

Here is the punch line: GW has reached the point at which cost cutting will continue to generate significant exceptional costs each year, and will reduce future sales.

Thus, they can't cut their way out of future large revenue declines. Your view on GW going forward should be based on this.

The core question is now: can they increase revenue and sales volumes?

If you genuinely believe this coming year can beat last year for them in terms of releases / quality / recruitment, then be optimistic. If you don't, you shouldn't be.

I am on the record as having said I think there are many ways to achieve this, but their current management is not able to do so.

WayneTheGame wrote:
2) What is the author's business credentials? I ask this one because we have several current or former managers/directors/CEOs here and on other forums (Azrael13, Wayshuba and Reinholt spring to mind immediately, to say nothing of the guy on MasterMinis, who given his past *really* knows his stuff) saying the opposite. While one can dismiss the above people as "haters" or whatever the term du jour is, they have background and knowledge to analyze these things, so for comparison I'd like to know what the author of that piece's qualifications are.

They did exactly that in the comments section.

calebwatson wrote:Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Slow down there partner. The interwebz says the company is going under and about to close. They would know because they have no clue what P&L or KOI mean.

Trust me sir. I’ve been over to dakka and all the CEO’s that go there tell me things are so bad that GW is going burn the place down and collect the insurance money. It’s the only way!!

Ignore the fact that GW has posted profit the last three annual reports and has little debt to speak of. Going under I tell you sirs!!

fluger wrote:Yeah, I’m just amazed at how many CEOs of global companies post on Dakka and have time to offer their considerable insight. Truly, we are blessed by their knowledge.

But hey, Frontline's paying for ad space at least. lol...

But guys, they posted a profit. That's all that matters!


Nevermind that this profit is largely because they cut costs drastically and have almost nothing left to cut, and they still continue to face ever decreasing sales numbers.

But they posted a profit, guys!

Hmmm, username calebwatson? Posting disparaging things about Dakka on another site while maintaining a shameless, some could almost say mindless, pro-GW slant?

I do hope his brother lobbywatson, who posts here regularly, isn't upset.....

fluger wrote:Yeah, I’m just amazed at how many CEOs of global companies post on Dakka and have time to offer their considerable insight. Truly, we are blessed by their knowledge.

Yet the author is so important and busy he had the time to write and publish an essay online....

I can't help but think there isn't a bit of a bias/spin situation going on there from a site who's focus is on 40k.

I'll trust the words of people with more business acumen, all of which seem to be largely in agreement.

Ouuf, lots of victims in this thread! Look out GW, the mean ol' internet's gonna getcha! And lord knows they need the defense, a muli-million dollar company is in a pretty weak spot to put up any defense against criticism or otherwise.

 Yonan wrote:

Toofast wrote:
He takes optimism to a whole new level. He keeps talking about one time investments effecting profit while doing his best to willfully ignore the fact that they lost 8.2% in revenue and had their worst sales year ever at a time when prices are the highest and they put out the most new releases.
Also your thread title made me lol. I thought you were going to link an article on the onion when I read that as by every measure possible, GW had their worst financial year ever and doesn't even know why or how to turn it around.

*double take*
Are you changing sides? ; p The title *is* hilarious.

I've noticed this actually quite a number of times. And it's not a bad thing, everyone is free to have their opinion (change or otherwise) on these matters. I think to my own case often- I started out groaning at the people complaining about GW's practices years ago, I felt like they were over-blowing what was happening and that GW would right the ship. But that never happened, GW kept chugging away at things until one day something happened (probably "Spot the Space Marine") and I had to say "really? REALLY??" That killed a lot of my "investment" into the brand, I started to look at GW more as a miniatures company and less as the brand I identified with in terms of wargaming.

If your definition of a 'Great Article' is one that says that GW is doing well, then it is a great article.

If your definition of a 'Great Article' means one that substantiates that claim then, no, it is not a great article.

It is an article written by somebody that desperately wants GW to be doing okay, and is wearing rose colored glasses in order to maintain that point of view.

It is a bad article, that does not substantiate or support its claims.

The folks claiming that it is a 'Great Article' are doing so because it fits their own bias.

The Auld Grump - I actually expected GW to do better than it did towards the end of the year.