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.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Musashi363 wrote:
So Games Workshop's own annual report is an opinion? I honestly doubt you read the report.

No. read context and stop wasting time. The "evidence" he refers to is this thread. the Financial Report is all over the web. google it for two seconds. you'll find it.

You cannot HAVE proof the company will be gone in 18 months because it doesnt EXIST. This needs to be EXPLAINED to you?

and now you're going to follow that up with suggesting I heaven't read the report we've JUST been sitting here talking about?

Gimme a break.

Could you be ruder? Dude, calm down. There's no need to be like that. Even if you're correct, no one's going to listen to you because it sounds like you're acting overly aggressive to compensate for a lack of anything real to say. You'd do far better if you didn't insult everyone that disagreed with you.

Edit: In other words, you're dragging down an entire thread by your childish behavior.

If you're incapable of posting without being insulting to other users then it's really best you don't post at all.

Further such posts will continue to be deleted.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Musashi363 wrote:
So Games Workshop's own annual report is an opinion? I honestly doubt you read the report.

No. read context and stop wasting time. The "evidence" he refers to is this thread. the Financial Report is all over the web. google it for two seconds. you'll find it.

You cannot HAVE proof the company will be gone in 18 months because it doesnt EXIST. This needs to be EXPLAINED to you?

and now you're going to follow that up with suggesting I heaven't read the report we've JUST been sitting here talking about?

Gimme a break.

By the very same terrible logic you cannot prove they won't fail. So therefore its all pointless. And if all speculation was pointless, it sure wouldn't be the multi-trillion dollar world of finance it is today...

Long story short is GW has a lot of money wrapped up in capital that it cannot further cut without cutting off more revenue streams. I don't need to rehash statements youve readily ignored as it's obvious you've clung to left field ideas that just don't apply to the situation. And if you've read the report, as you've now stated, you know you're wrong and thus not addressing them yo save face.

Your premise is flawed as it stands.

All I see is more releases with less raw revenue. The raw fact is people are buying less. Thats no good no matter what business your in.

I myself have drastically reduced my GW purchases. The only shop that carries GW in my city (a major metropolitan area)is the GW store itself. All the FLGS have fully adopted war machine. So basically I can't get games in anymore, as the few tables at the GW store are always full.

I also don't want to throw anymore money at something that I am increasingly viewing as an uncertain proposition. I dont want to spemd thousands on an army that may no longer work next update. Or even worse find everyone has abandoned the game for one reason or another

I am inclined to discount the opinions of someone who apparently has no idea of the strategic impact that a CIO has on the physical and operational ends of a multi-national corporation.

 agnosto wrote:
I am inclined to discount the opinions of someone who apparently has no idea of the strategic impact that a CIO has on the physical and operational ends of a multi-national corporation.

Me too. Good thing no one does. I know what a CIO does. I also know what he DOESNT do.

 Jancoran wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
I am inclined to discount the opinions of someone who apparently has no idea of the strategic impact that a CIO has on the physical and operational ends of a multi-national corporation.

Me too. Good thing no one does. I know what a CIO does. I also know what he DOESNT do.

Every company is different and only about 13% of companies have a real CIO on staff. It's very much a growth field and how they work into the corporate vision and infrastructure of the business greatly depends upon how "mature" the position is in that particular company. Aldi for example utilizes their CIO to inform corporate growth and restructuring plans as well as logistical enterprises. There are some great white papers that CIO magazine has put together and brought from various sources that detail how important this corporate role is in the growth and direction of a company; especially those dependent upon ecommerce.

 agnosto wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
I am inclined to discount the opinions of someone who apparently has no idea of the strategic impact that a CIO has on the physical and operational ends of a multi-national corporation.

Me too. Good thing no one does. I know what a CIO does. I also know what he DOESNT do.

Every company is different and only about 13% of companies have a real CIO on staff. It's very much a growth field and how they work into the corporate vision and infrastructure of the business greatly depends upon how "mature" the position is in that particular company. Aldi for example utilizes their CIO to inform corporate growth and restructuring plans as well as logistical enterprises. There are some great white papers that CIO magazine has put together and brought from various sources that detail how important this corporate role is in the growth and direction of a company; especially those dependent upon ecommerce.

I wonder what kind of feedback a CIO would have to a company that spent £4M on a new website based upon zero market research while moving a drastic amount of the company's product to direct order online only?

 TheKbob wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
I am inclined to discount the opinions of someone who apparently has no idea of the strategic impact that a CIO has on the physical and operational ends of a multi-national corporation.

Me too. Good thing no one does. I know what a CIO does. I also know what he DOESNT do.

Every company is different and only about 13% of companies have a real CIO on staff. It's very much a growth field and how they work into the corporate vision and infrastructure of the business greatly depends upon how "mature" the position is in that particular company. Aldi for example utilizes their CIO to inform corporate growth and restructuring plans as well as logistical enterprises. There are some great white papers that CIO magazine has put together and brought from various sources that detail how important this corporate role is in the growth and direction of a company; especially those dependent upon ecommerce.

I wonder what kind of feedback a CIO would have to a company that spent £4M on a new website based upon zero market research while moving a drastic amount of the company's product to direct order online only?

For the size of the company in question and taking into consideration the online sales nature and multinational presence, the amount isn't terrible; however the final product shows that there was a lack in communication or research either resulting from the company not communicating their needs adequately or poor performance from a business analyst (BA) on the vendor side.

 TheKbob wrote:
....moving a drastic amount of the company's product to direct order online only?

I'm sure GW sees at least this portion as a win.

Everything they sell direct they are selling at full retail, instead of wholesale.
Everything they sell at full retail is worth at least twice as many wholesale sales to them.
If sales are declining, they want those remaining sales to be direct.

Datacards are a perfect example.
Pre 7th edition cards are still sitting on retailer shelves.
They've moved them to limited run, which saves them on production and storage costs
They are selling completely out. The limited nature increases the collectabilty and generated a secondary market.
The only relaible way to ensure your getting them is to pre-order them
The only way to get out of paying the shipping charge is order a box set of something else to bump up the total

GW now sold you at least two items at full retail
GW does the same trick over again with the next codex release

I've never quite understood how a number of posters can't take negative comments about GW without making them akin to insulting their god. The Grey Knights codex is a great example- NOBODY should be applauding them for taking units out of the book, that's just insane! They took units out of the book and then charged you MORE (66% to be exact) and this is seen as a good thing!? I just don't get why people can't all agree and say "that's a pretty lousy move by GW. It's not enough to stop me from buying models but it's pretty lousy."

I mean honestly, I'm sure there were people defending GW when they tried to sue the writers of "Spots the Space Marine"! Is accepting that GW has flaws some sort of anathema that brings about a sudden collapse of idolization? Do you fear that as soon as you admit one thing is wrong about the company, that they will find out and revoke your loyalty card?

It's like attacking GW becomes an automatic attack on some posters. You say "boy, GW really sucks by doing such-and-such" and they respond with "HOW DARE YOU!" You try to be reasonable and show empirical evidence, which gets swatted away as "hater speech." I just don't get being that passionate about *any* tabletop game, be it Warmachine, Infinity, X-Wing, Maulifaux, or...Warhammer 40k.

 Accolade wrote:
I've never quite understood how a number of posters can't take negative comments about GW and make it akin to insulting their god. The Grey Knights codex is a great example- NOBODY should be applauding them for taking units out of the book, that's just insane! They took units out of the book and then charged you MORE (66% to be exact) and this is seen as a good thing!? I just don't get why people can't all agree and say "that's a pretty lousy move by GW. It's not enough to stop me from buying models but it's pretty lousy."

I mean honestly, I'm sure there were people defending GW when they tried to sue the writers of "Spots the Space Marine"! Is accepting that GW has flaws some sort of anathema that brings about a sudden collapse of idolization? Do you fear that as soon as you admit one thing is wrong about the company, that they will find out and revoke your loyalty card?

It's like attacking GW becomes an automatic attack on some posters. You say "boy, GW really sucks by doing such-and-such" and they respond with "HOW DARE YOU!" You try to be reasonable and show empirical evidence, which gets swatted away as "hater speech." I just don't get being that passionate about *any* tabletop game, be it Warmachine, Infinity, X-Wing, Maulifaux, or...Warhammer 40k.

Can we get this as a sticky?

Yeah that needs ten thousand exalts and a sticky

Shocker, but I say negative things about other companies from time to time. And in those discussion with fans, more or less what Accolade says "Yea, that sucks, I choose not to support that" or "yep, it's dumb, but I'm buying it."

It still doesn't make sense, but there's another layer of incredulity and denial in the Warhammer 40k community directly bred from the fission between gamers of different types. Usually other games are far more clear cut and attracts on audience in majority of a certain type or there's a lot less emotional bias spurred by massive sunk costs.

I also have a lot of positive to say about other game companies, but if you ever put liking another game or game company in the same post about something bad about Games Workshop, you're automatically a fanboy of the opposing game and/or company. It's essentially the same logic that goes into video game console wars, but the division isn't between consoles but within the very same game.


/sarcasm

 Accolade wrote:


It's like attacking GW becomes an automatic attack on some posters. You say "boy, GW really sucks by doing such-and-such" and they respond with "HOW DARE YOU!" You try to be reasonable and show empirical evidence, which gets swatted away as "hater speech." I just don't get being that passionate about *any* tabletop game, be it Warmachine, Infinity, X-Wing, Maulifaux, or...Warhammer 40k.

Totaly agree. Warmahordes was and still kind of is super popular here. But PP turned their asses on us in many different ways. Starting from not being able to order stuff for stores and ending with them not wanting to sign up a contract with a new distributor for Poland. But no one will call you a GW fanboy for saying that about PP. Heck even saying that cygnar is 90% stormwall faction makes you called one.

 TheKbob wrote:
Shocker, but I say negative things about other companies from time to time. And in those discussion with fans, more or less what Accolade says "Yea, that sucks, I choose not to support that" or "yep, it's dumb, but I'm buying it."

It still doesn't make sense, but there's another layer of incredulity and denial in the Warhammer 40k community directly bred from the fission between gamers of different types. Usually other games are far more clear cut and attracts on audience in majority of a certain type or there's a lot less emotional bias spurred by massive sunk costs.

I also have a lot of positive to say about other game companies, but if you ever put liking another game or game company in the same post about something bad about Games Workshop, you're automatically a fanboy of the opposing game and/or company. It's essentially the same logic that goes into video game console wars, but the division isn't between consoles but within the very same game.

Complaining about business practices is a necessary component of commercial activity. Companies absolutely depend on people complaining in order to improve their business models, and it's not really anyone's business to tell you what you can and cannot say, or how you can say it.

Personally, I believe the best relationship to have with any entity that makes anything for you is a combative one, where they must give you the best product for the best price or you will badmouth them before all your friend. It makes me very uncomfortable to feel satisfied with everything a company does, and I usually look at that as a sign of apathy.

That's why I hate those threads where people are saying it's time to say something nice about Games Workshop. I get what you mean about the denial in the 40k community, there's times it makes me think these people don't understand their role as consumers.

Personally, I believe the best relationship to have with any entity that makes anything for you is a combative one, where they must give you the best product for the best price or you will badmouth them before all your friend. It makes me very uncomfortable to feel satisfied with everything a company does, and I usually look at that as a sign of apathy.

Exactly. That is how capitalism is supposed to work. The producer needs to compete with other producers for the consumer's business. If it cannot adequately do that, it should fail.