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.
Got to count in server costs, security, secure pay systems etc
Won,t be cheap on there scale
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 15:02:58
Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.
"May the odds be ever in your favour"
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.
FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.
Got to count in server costs, security, secure pay systems etc
Won,t be cheap on there scale
But, why?
They already had a website (so it's not like they were starting from scratch). Really, all they seemed to be doing was removing most of the features of the old site and turning it into a pure webstore. That really needed £4000000?
"Yes, Mr. Kirby, this Champagne Fountain is the linchpin of the entire website."
"In fact, we've had to rent the entire internet to get this new site working. Here, see for yourself."
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
I recently had a conversation with a co-worker (logistics) about this. Many businesses overstate the cost of things. There are two reasons: Justification of cost to the consumer and minimizing apparent profit.
GW could be a victim of paying a silly premium for tech services which many are, or they could want to have a larger operating cost.
CrosisDePurger wrote: I recently had a conversation with a co-worker (logistics) about this. Many businesses overstate the cost of things. There are two reasons: Justification of cost to the consumer and minimizing apparent profit.
GW could be a victim of paying a silly premium for tech services which many are, or they could want to have a larger operating cost.
Wouldn't that be lying to their investors? Since they said, specifically, that the new web store cost was £4m and it had an adverse effect on their earnings...
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
It is illegal to overstate costs in order to reduce your tax bill.
The cost of redesigning the site would be easily provable by the invoices from the agency. If these seemed excessive -- that is to say, deliberately padded -- the tax man might query them and cross-check with other similar cases.
Of course this does not mean that GW did not pay over the odds just because of incompetence. We know they were incompetent at IP law. They could easily have been incompetent at IT as well.
CrosisDePurger wrote: I recently had a conversation with a co-worker (logistics) about this. Many businesses overstate the cost of things. There are two reasons: Justification of cost to the consumer and minimizing apparent profit.
GW could be a victim of paying a silly premium for tech services which many are, or they could want to have a larger operating cost.
I'm, currently involved in a project to remake a contact center for a major financial institution, our platform will be required to service over 2000 agents and be able to service more than 10 million individual clients each day, 24/7 in a completely secure and redundant platform.
Approximate cost of the project: $3,5 million
I haven't even begun to understand how GW's web store cost them what it did...
Or maybe people in the internet who never worked in a commercial international environment have no idea of what is needed to have a legally sound webshop, that allows you to tackle all markets.
Yes, for you garage company you can set up a page and a shop for a fraction of that money. But that's a bit like saying "My basement workshop has tools for 600€, why does your car workshop needs tools for tens of thousands of €".
Maybe there are things you can't see from the outside. These days many companies link their ERP and their webshops and believe me, if you have a bunch of SAP consultants setting up the interfaces you've paid a million on their salaries and licenses without having run a single transaction over the system...
So if you feel better after it just continue ranting. And if you are seriously that much better than many people in the business... why are you strolling the internet and not running your own multi million dollar business. Cause if you really can do it better, you should
My armies:
Eldar Necron Chaos Space Marines Grey Knights Imperial Knights Death Guard
Murenius wrote: Or maybe people in the internet who never worked in a commercial international environment have no idea of what is needed to have a legally sound webshop, that allows you to tackle all markets.
Yes, for you garage company you can set up a page and a shop for a fraction of that money. But that's a bit like saying "My basement workshop has tools for 600€, why does your car workshop needs tools for tens of thousands of €".
Maybe there are things you can't see from the outside. These days many companies link their ERP and their webshops and believe me, if you have a bunch of SAP consultants setting up the interfaces you've paid a million on their salaries and licenses without having run a single transaction over the system...
So if you feel better after it just continue ranting. And if you are seriously that much better than many people in the business... why are you strolling the internet and not running your own multi million dollar business. Cause if you really can do it better, you should
Read my post, then remove your foot from your mouth, it might make it difficult for you to eat dinner tonight otherwise.
Read my post, then remove your foot from your mouth, it might make it difficult for you to eat dinner tonight otherwise.
I did read your post - no need to get insulting by the way. Why would this make any difference, evidence by example? Your argumentation would only work if this was in the same country/countries, the same market, had the same requirements, the same SLAs... and so on.
It's still valid: without knowing exact functional requirements and details you can't compare costs.
My armies:
Eldar Necron Chaos Space Marines Grey Knights Imperial Knights Death Guard
Phantom, you didn't follow the rules of talking about GW:
Are you saying something positive about GW? Great! Continue to show your support through additional product purchase.
Are you saying something negative about GW? You have no idea what you're talking about, the minds at GW function at a level you couldn't possibly understand. After all, how can tax men (aka Kirby) actually be wrong?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 17:45:53
There's a couple of misunderstandings occurring here, firstly, the exceptional costs are nothing to do with the webstore, but to do with restructuring..
Structural re-organisation
As part of our constant drive to improve efficiency and reduce costs as well as in response to the realities of trading conditions in southern Europe we reorganised our sales structures during the last five months. These changes will also enable us to focus on the performance of our continental european retail and trade sales channels.
Until January 2014 we had a country based system with management in local countries and all the associated costs. We have closed four european offices (Aix-en-Provence, Dusseldorf, Barcelona and Frascati), consolidating trade sales in Nottingham, and have one manager for all continental european stores based in a new, tiny, office in Dusseldorf (he's mostly on the road, of course). Back office functions take place in Nottingham as far as possible. North american local autonomy was removed and for that region trade sales now reports to Nottingham and a new retail manager was appointed at the same time. Back office functions in North America now report to the appropriate manager in Nottingham.
At the same time we flattened our retail structures completely by removing all middle management.
It is early days but results so far have been encouraging. Sales in the last quarter are up on their equivalent quarter and costs down. There is also a stronger sense of belonging and Games-Workshop-ness. As I said in the preamble with my other hat on, it has been a really good year.
We paid £4.5 million for these benefits and we have classified these as exceptional costs. The costs and benefits are analysed below:
Our operations in Australia and New Zealand and Asia remain unchanged.
Also, while it does appear that GW have invested £4m in the webstore, only £0.9m was spent in this accounting year, the majority of the money was spent in the last accounting period.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 17:43:55
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: There's a couple of misunderstandings occurring here, firstly, the exceptional costs are nothing to do with the webstore, but to do with restructuring..
Taken verbatim from the chairman's preamble this year:
The new web store allows us to sell online more efficiently. It cost around £4 million.
We invested in shop fits: 44 new stores and 4 refurbishments. We invested an additional £0.9 million in the new web store (2013: £3.1 million) and £2.6 million in tooling, and milling and injection moulding machines. Capital investment is expected to be higher than depreciation and amortisation over the next few years as we upgrade our back office systems in Nottingham
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 18:28:00
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
I did read your post - no need to get insulting by the way.
You basically said that I didn't knew what I was talking about regarding something that is part and parcel of my profession and I'm the one that is insulting someone?
Why would this make any difference, evidence by example? Your argumentation would only work if this was in the same country/countries, the same market, had the same requirements, the same SLAs... and so on.
It's still valid: without knowing exact functional requirements and details you can't compare costs.
No, you are wrong.
What you are saying doesn't make any sense, software and hardware requirements for a web store are practically universal (and GW's web store appears to be built from "straight of the shelf" products), baring some weird legislation regarding data protection in countries like Venezuela and China, the rest of the world generally operates under the same rules and generally has the same development costs.
And no, a web store for a niche company will not have nearly the same requirements that a contact centre for a financial institution, not in data protection, not in redundancy, not in the expected number of transactions.
We invested in shop fits: 44 new stores and 4 refurbishments. We invested an additional £0.9 million in the new web store (2013: £3.1 million) and £2.6 million in tooling, and milling and injection moulding machines. Capital investment is expected to be higher than depreciation and amortisation over the next few years as we upgrade our back office systems in Nottingham
You've lost me, what does any of that has to do with the cost of the web store?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 18:30:02
Azreal13 wrote: There's a couple of misunderstandings occurring here, firstly, the exceptional costs are nothing to do with the webstore, but to do with restructuring..
Structural re-organisation
As part of our constant drive to improve efficiency and reduce costs as well as in response to the realities of trading conditions in southern Europe we reorganised our sales structures during the last five months. These changes will also enable us to focus on the performance of our continental european retail and trade sales channels.
Until January 2014 we had a country based system with management in local countries and all the associated costs. We have closed four european offices (Aix-en-Provence, Dusseldorf, Barcelona and Frascati), consolidating trade sales in Nottingham, and have one manager for all continental european stores based in a new, tiny, office in Dusseldorf (he's mostly on the road, of course). Back office functions take place in Nottingham as far as possible. North american local autonomy was removed and for that region trade sales now reports to Nottingham and a new retail manager was appointed at the same time. Back office functions in North America now report to the appropriate manager in Nottingham.
At the same time we flattened our retail structures completely by removing all middle management.
It is early days but results so far have been encouraging. Sales in the last quarter are up on their equivalent quarter and costs down. There is also a stronger sense of belonging and Games-Workshop-ness. As I said in the preamble with my other hat on, it has been a really good year.
We paid £4.5 million for these benefits and we have classified these as exceptional costs. The costs and benefits are analysed below:
Our operations in Australia and New Zealand and Asia remain unchanged.
Also, while it does appear that GW have invested £4m in the webstore, only £0.9m was spent in this accounting year, the majority of the money was spent in the last accounting period.
Thanks for the explanation, Azreal. I believe you're under the mindset that they overspent, but I wanted to check to get your full opinion on this since you went through the notes of the report
We invested in shop fits: 44 new stores and 4 refurbishments. We invested an additional £0.9 million in the new web store (2013: £3.1 million) and £2.6 million in tooling, and milling and injection moulding machines. Capital investment is expected to be higher than depreciation and amortisation over the next few years as we upgrade our back office systems in Nottingham
You've lost me, what does any of that has to do with the cost of the web store?
I've seen a number of people appear to attribute the 4m exceptional cost in the report to the webstore, which isn't the case, they have spent 4m on a webstore, but that isn't the reason for the exceptional cost listed in the report, so they've spent 4m on the webstore and another 4m on a staff exterminatus.
Azreal13 wrote: There's a couple of misunderstandings occurring here, firstly, the exceptional costs are nothing to do with the webstore, but to do with restructuring..
Structural re-organisation
As part of our constant drive to improve efficiency and reduce costs as well as in response to the realities of trading conditions in southern Europe we reorganised our sales structures during the last five months. These changes will also enable us to focus on the performance of our continental european retail and trade sales channels.
Until January 2014 we had a country based system with management in local countries and all the associated costs. We have closed four european offices (Aix-en-Provence, Dusseldorf, Barcelona and Frascati), consolidating trade sales in Nottingham, and have one manager for all continental european stores based in a new, tiny, office in Dusseldorf (he's mostly on the road, of course). Back office functions take place in Nottingham as far as possible. North american local autonomy was removed and for that region trade sales now reports to Nottingham and a new retail manager was appointed at the same time. Back office functions in North America now report to the appropriate manager in Nottingham.
At the same time we flattened our retail structures completely by removing all middle management.
It is early days but results so far have been encouraging. Sales in the last quarter are up on their equivalent quarter and costs down. There is also a stronger sense of belonging and Games-Workshop-ness. As I said in the preamble with my other hat on, it has been a really good year.
We paid £4.5 million for these benefits and we have classified these as exceptional costs. The costs and benefits are analysed below:
Our operations in Australia and New Zealand and Asia remain unchanged.
Also, while it does appear that GW have invested £4m in the webstore, only £0.9m was spent in this accounting year, the majority of the money was spent in the last accounting period.
Thanks for the explanation, Azreal. I believe you're under the mindset that they overspent, but I wanted to check to get your full opinion on this since you went through the notes of the report
Honestly, I wouldn't consider myself qualified to judge, it sure seems like a lot, but I've no more experience with commissioning websites than I have with importing bananas.
Certainly spending what would have been a significant percentage of the annual profit to but the bullet into management is difficult to be positive about, they had either let themselves grow bloated around the middle, or were desperate to cut costs, neither of which are positive signs of a well run company.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 19:01:31
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
Murenius wrote: Or maybe people in the internet who never worked in a commercial international environment have no idea of what is needed to have a legally sound webshop, that allows you to tackle all markets.
I work with Fortune 500 companies daily who lose thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars a minute for downtime. GW simply isn't big enough to have spent £4m on that sort of project.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
I think it would be less of a head-scratcher if the website at least looked like it had that much money spent on it, rather than looking like a straight out of the box generic webcart. And a bad one at that.
insaniak wrote: I think it would be less of a head-scratcher if the website at least looked like it had that much money spent on it, rather than looking like a straight out of the box generic webcart. And a bad one at that.
It would also make sense if the overwhelming majority of the cash spent on it was spent the year before the new look store took over from the old site.
I'm a bit hazy on dates off the top of my head, so it might be that calendar and accounting years intersect, but it looks like 3m was spent for no obvious improvement at all, and then a further £0.9m spent making it into the vanilla bore fest we have now.
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
I'm sorry, I have to say this again since it hasn't been addressed and I feel like it's pretty important to the situation at hand: wasn't Tom Kirby's wife attached to this project as some sort of "consultant"?
EDIT: I mean, I'd be more accepting of the idea that they got run through the ringer if this bit of information wasn't the case.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 20:12:50
insaniak wrote: I think it would be less of a head-scratcher if the website at least looked like it had that much money spent on it, rather than looking like a straight out of the box generic webcart. And a bad one at that.
Agreed.
Also, maybe if they'd actually be adding features and turning it into more of a hobby site, rather than removing everything but the webstore.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
Accolade wrote: I'm sorry, I have to say this again since it hasn't been addressed and I feel like it's pretty important to the situation at hand: wasn't Tom Kirby's wife attached to this project as some sort of "consultant"?
EDIT: I mean, I'd be more accepting of the idea that they got run through the ringer if this bit of information wasn't the case.
I think it was one of those things that was originally said in jest that has kind of gained traction without any basis in fact.
That said, it is easily checked if anyone knows Mrs Kirby's christian name(s)
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
From what I remember Mrs Kirby was the head of the project but I can't remember where I read that.
It could be a complete canard as suggested above by Azreal13.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Back on topic, we now know that the new web store cost £4 million over two years, but we are still not sure if that was a real bargain, a total rip-off, or a fair price.
It seems rather on the high side to me, in view of what they rolled out, but that is easily explicable by incompetence.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/19 20:57:41
