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.
Jehan-reznor wrote: Specialists games were just a money pit for GW, That they were entry games and gotta a lot of love from the Veterans was not relevant, need to reduce costs away Specialist games went!
No, they weren't. All the SG's were profitable to some extent. They were axed because of the move away from metal and, I reckon, GW erroneously believed that all the SG buyers would move over to the main games. Well, the cancellation of the Specialist Games has allowed myriad competitors to spring up filling that niche quite nicely.
Maybe i phrased that wrong IMHOGW management thought it gave not enough return, that there were other benefits to these games didn't enter the equation.
Yeah I think the issue was that they would make a bigger return on other things, and just assumed that they cannibalized sales from the big lines and that dropping them would move people over to WHF/40K.
In reality, dropping them moved people over to Dreadball, Dungeonball, Guildball, Dropzone Commander, Infinity, Malifaux, and so on.
I think they've also stopped caring about anything that doesn't result in a immediate direct profit (good will, customer retention). Presumably because Kirby is about to retire and doesn't care about the long term as much as he does about his dividends.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/10 08:15:16
Shotgun wrote: While GW has said they don't do market research they presumably do look at the data they have in house and can at least act upon it.
I don't know if they even do that. Obviously, we can't look at their volume of sales, but if we were to assume that a space marine tac squad is representative of their products (in fairness space marines are probably their best selling product), and we compare sales revenue divided by their price over the last two years, we get something like this.
2013: 5.8 million units sold. 2014: 4.9 million units sold.
If we cross reference that with the £2 increase in price since 2013, we get a price elasticity of about 1.78. Which would suggest the optimum price for a tactical squad (I.e. the price that would maximise their own revenue) would be around £16.00 ($25).
This actually sounds about right to me personally, and If we compare that figure with the dakka survey on a reasonable price for a tac squad, we can see that $25 is just slightly in front of the mode, which is where it aught to be. So even though this is only a crude estimate, it is at least corroborated quite nicely by the survey.
Any economist would be able to tell this stuff from their figures. Yet GW bring out the new BAtac squad, and slap £26 on it... The only issue I can see is that customers (especially in the past) have tended to finish armies and eat the price hikes for many months before they finally stop buying. So there might be quite a lag period between GW raising prices and feeling the effect. If this wasn't accounted for then they might mistakenly believe that they can just keep raising prices forever, and people will keep eating it indefinitely. Sadly, that actually seems to be exactly what they think, which just shows how out of touch they are with their customers, and reality.
Of course, I'm making the assumption here that the dip in sales is solely due to price. GW seem to assume price is no object, and that sales are dipping because of other factors, for example they have blamed computer games, and recently the economy. I guess that could still be true, but everyone I know who has quit GW (and that is now everyone that I know, that ever played GW), they all quit for the same reason: prices got too high.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2015/06/10 16:18:38
Thats a pretty strong conclusion to draw from a self selective poll with under 3k respondents. I doubt that anyone really knows just how many people play 40K, not even GW. The 40K IP is strong, it is just about a household name and most if not all young males (<30) in the west will have heard of it (probably)
I really don't think so. 'Almost a household name' is really stretching it. This is a niche hobby. It might be more well known (or less well unknown) in the uk, but 'the west' is stretching it.
I could definitely believe it's well known in the UK though I haven't been there to know for sure, they have the highest density of GW stores per head of population and also land mass.
Over the rest of the world, I don't really think so.
Also I don't disagree that it's a strong conclusion, which is why I used the wording "would suggest" rather "shows conclusively". I'm open to new data showing better figures, but at this point it's the best we have and 3k respondents I would say is actually pretty high in the context of a wargame, if my estimate was right it would be about 2.5% of the total population or about 1 in 40 gamers.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/10 10:48:28
I could definitely believe it's well known in the UK though I haven't been there to know for sure, they have the highest density of GW stores per head of population and also land mass.
Over the rest of the world, I don't really think so.
Also I don't disagree that it's a strong conclusion, which is why I used the wording "would suggest" rather "shows conclusively". I'm open to new data showing better figures, but at this point it's the best we have and 3k respondents I would say is actually pretty high in the context of a wargame, if my estimate was right it would be about 2.5% of the total population or about 1 in 40 gamers.
It's kind of a 'British thing' I suppose - more people than you realise would be familiar with it, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it a household name. A lot of guys wIll have a box of 'warhammers' somewhere in their attic from when they were kids, and their sisters might remember their brothers playing with them when they were kids, but I think it's of a certain generation- those of us who were kids in the 80s and 90s more so than thr current generation. Press them on it and they might remember them, but as a general impression, I think far more people would know about world of Warcraft or Pokemon than things like warhammer or even mtg.
The pool of active wargamers is quite small. I think more people would be season ticket holders for any individual scottish championship football team than there would be active gamers.
Herzlos wrote: Yeah I think the issue was that they would make a bigger return on other things, and just assumed that they cannibalized sales from the big lines and that dropping them would move people over to WHF/40K.
In reality, dropping them moved people over to Dreadball, Dungeonball, Guildball, Dropzone Commander, Infinity, Malifaux, and so on.
I think they've also stopped caring about anything that doesn't result in a immediate direct profit (good will, customer retention). Presumably because Kirby is about to retire and doesn't care about the long term as much as he does about his dividends.
Devil's Advocate - According to the internets, Kirby has been set to retire since 2006 and has only been worried about short term gains since then. Heck, if you could go back to www.portent.net, I'm sure you could find people using the same narrative against Kirby all the way back to the late 90's. How is GW being short minded? They took a huge hit by pushing out Internet retailers to support brick and mortar stores. They are pushing to support their business partners better. This is a long term strategy and has more direct impact on the Company's financial statements than cutting specialist games. If GW was being short minded and wanted to boost their short term sales, they would sell their product to anyone who could turn it over quickly like Internet discount retailers.
Herzlos wrote: Yeah I think the issue was that they would make a bigger return on other things, and just assumed that they cannibalized sales from the big lines and that dropping them would move people over to WHF/40K.
In reality, dropping them moved people over to Dreadball, Dungeonball, Guildball, Dropzone Commander, Infinity, Malifaux, and so on.
I think they've also stopped caring about anything that doesn't result in a immediate direct profit (good will, customer retention). Presumably because Kirby is about to retire and doesn't care about the long term as much as he does about his dividends.
Devil's Advocate - According to the internets, Kirby has been set to retire since 2006 and has only been worried about short term gains since then. Heck, if you could go back to www.portent.net, I'm sure you could find people using the same narrative against Kirby all the way back to the late 90's.
I don't remember it being as bad in the 90's, but then I was 15. I assume Kirby has had the 8% stock since then though, so self-interest will have been a thing.
How is GW being short minded? They took a huge hit by pushing out Internet retailers to support brick and mortar stores. They are pushing to support their business partners better. This is a long term strategy and has more direct impact on the Company's financial statements than cutting specialist games. If GW was being short minded and wanted to boost their short term sales, they would sell their product to anyone who could turn it over quickly like Internet discount retailers.
I don't believe for a second that the internet retailers things was to help brick and mortar stores except their own. I think it was just to cut off the possibility of discounts. Same with the new trade rules on splitting boxes. Their approach was keeping the price up (and growing) and trying to drive as much traffic as possible through themselves.
Where's the long term strategy in forbidding US stores to sell online via a store instead of email, without even being allowed to use images or list stock?
Where's the long term strategy in reducing stock availability to 3rd parties?
What about dropping the specialist games, vets nights, and gaming tables from stores, or going to 1-man, and high street retailers stocking the starter boxes*?
What about getting rid of the regional HQ's, or the web content, or the Games Days or Tournament support?
What about all the shovelware mobile games, or the digital supplements, or White Dwarf?
All of that fits in with a maximum profit right now approach.
*When I got into gaming, every other town centre had somewhere that sold Hero Quest and 40K boxes. In the UK it was Argos and toy stores, in the US I think it was Walmart. Essentially, if it sold Scrabble, it sold GW/MB stuff. Now it's not even available in Board-game-geek stores.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/10 12:01:57
Herzlos wrote: Yeah I think the issue was that they would make a bigger return on other things, and just assumed that they cannibalized sales from the big lines and that dropping them would move people over to WHF/40K.
In reality, dropping them moved people over to Dreadball, Dungeonball, Guildball, Dropzone Commander, Infinity, Malifaux, and so on.
I think they've also stopped caring about anything that doesn't result in a immediate direct profit (good will, customer retention). Presumably because Kirby is about to retire and doesn't care about the long term as much as he does about his dividends.
Devil's Advocate - According to the internets, Kirby has been set to retire since 2006 and has only been worried about short term gains since then. Heck, if you could go back to www.portent.net, I'm sure you could find people using the same narrative against Kirby all the way back to the late 90's. How is GW being short minded? They took a huge hit by pushing out Internet retailers to support brick and mortar stores. They are pushing to support their business partners better. This is a long term strategy and has more direct impact on the Company's financial statements than cutting specialist games. If GW was being short minded and wanted to boost their short term sales, they would sell their product to anyone who could turn it over quickly like Internet discount retailers.
Go and ask all those owners of B+M stores how that's worked out for them.
Seriously, that's a terrible argument to try and make, major stores (Miniature Market for instance) have cut GW entirely, my nearest Indy has never sold GW and to have retailers (Mikhalia being the most prominent) frequently bemoaning policies as either pants on head stupid to borderline illegal on this very message board, heavily suggests you haven't really got a grasp of the facts.
Their own stores are spectacularly underperforming and they have already heavily implied that their third party sales are down this year, there is zero evidence that they're supporting B+M stores, even their own, and there's a wealth of evidence that suggests rather than support their business partners, they're trying their best to squeeze them out of the chain altogether.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/10 12:08:48
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
Yeah, I was pretty sure, but I wasn't going to drop out of writing the post to check, so I hedged.
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
boyd wrote: This is a long term strategy and has more direct impact on the Company's financial statements than cutting specialist games.
Cutting specialist games was a completely foolish decision, especially if you look around today's market. Take BFG for example. It was a popular and profitable game to sell and even FW directly acknowledged their BFG models sold well and continuously. Even now, if FW were to do Battlefleet: Heresy, it'd be a winner.
But cutting it entirely? So many companies and games have stepped up into the void left by GW - X-Wing, Firestorm Armada, the upcoming Halo Battles and Dropfleet Commander, Star Wars Armada, on and on. Same goes for the rest of the lines cut as well. They've just handed their competitors the golden gift of an eager market after a certain product. In this case, a bunch of gamers wanting to play spaceship games.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/10 14:12:02
It's not really a household name over here. I mean I've run into people who have heard of them (or heard of 'Warhammer' at least) but I've equally run into people who don't have a clue. Especially these days where even the shops here are pretty out of the way of main high streets. They used to sell it in Waterstones (back when it was Ottakars) and Hobbycraft, but not anymore. I can imagine it's more commonly known here than elsewhere but 'household name' is definitely reaching.
I really don't think so. 'Almost a household name' is really stretching it.
Everyone that I have mentioned wargaming to over recent years has at least been vaguely aware of Games Workshop, and that includes various female colleagues in their 50s. In fact the only person who didn't have a clue was from Zimbabwe. In the UK at least GW is a household name (or very close to it). GW has even found its way onto mainstream television (usually as a joke but at least people are expected to know whats funny).
Thats not really the point though; in the 'young(ish) and geeky' demographic 40k has a lot of weight.
I really don't think so. 'Almost a household name' is really stretching it.
Everyone that I have mentioned wargaming to over recent years has at least been vaguely aware of Games Workshop, and that includes various female colleagues in their 50s. In fact the only person who didn't have a clue was from Zimbabwe. In the UK at least GW is a household name (or very close to it). GW has even found its way onto mainstream television (usually as a joke but at least people are expected to know whats funny).
Thats not really the point though; in the 'young(ish) and geeky' demographic 40k has a lot of weight.
Even if it is a household name in the UK... I still think the IP is a bit overrated by the fans. Star Wars, Star Trek, Halo, Game of Thrones, Battlestar Galactica, Warcraft, Marvel Comics, etc, I think a new company would be more interested in those IP's than 40k. You can pick almost any AAA video game and it would have sold vastly more copies than GW has active customers. And even if they were interested in 40k, I don't think it'd be to support the lumbering behemoth/convoluted mess of what GW created but rather to create smaller offshoot games.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/10 16:08:31
Oddly enough in the 3 odd "local" stores in my area I actually feel the squeeze of Magic the Gathering.
~80% of income for one of the stores and on the three magic nights the place is crammed.
Talking to the owner for this store he says any young person asking about 40k "most of the time" had a father who played it.
The rest of the time they are an immigrant from the UK.
The 2-3% dregs is from someone who played Magic or Pokémon who happened to see the 40k guys playing on the Thursday.
Again, this is no great study, just stores in the area of a couple universities and a college and some observations: regional results may vary.
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Even if it is a household name in the UK... I still think the IP is a bit overrated by the fans. Star Wars, Star Trek, Halo, Game of Thrones, Battlestar Galactica, Warcraft, Marvel Comics, etc, I think a new company would be more interested in those IP's than 40k. You can pick almost any AAA video game and it would have sold vastly more copies than GW has active customers. And even if they were interested in 40k, I don't think it'd be to support the lumbering behemoth/convoluted mess of what GW created but rather to create smaller offshoot games.
I'm not really sure what your point is. Yes GW's games are nowhere near as popular as something like Star Wars but that most certainly doesn't mean that they aren't valuable as an IP; as can be seen by the sheer volume of GW licensed games that are coming out, not least Warhammer Total War, or that GW isn't a viable business (at least if run by someone at least semi competent).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/10 16:18:49
Almost exclusively as something they "used to play when they were younger", though.
Nostalgia is a very powerful force.
I agree, that's what makes the Space Hulk limited edition so stupid. Lots of nostalgic gamers going into GW stores after 20 years to give Space Hulk a go only to be told it's sold out and not coming back.
Nostalgia has an impact, sure, but obviously not enough as most of the ex-gamers are still ex-gamers. I suspect the massive price hikes since their last purchase and the lack of specialist games will kill off most nostalgia inspired interest.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/10 16:20:14
Household name? Every male in the West under 30? You're kidding me. Here in the U.S., I've barely met anyone who knows about tabletop wargaming at all, let alone GW. There's probably a significant segment of nerds who haven't heard of it. D&D and Pokemon are household names. Magic is too, to a lesser degree. Unless you've been in an FLGS or have a sibling or parent who's involved, you've more than likely never heard of Warhammer.
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." -Napoleon
This is from the Motley Fool UK site. From an article dated May 22. Discuss.
Games Workshop Group
Goblin emporium Games Workshop (LSE: GAW) is one of the leading chargers in Friday trade and was recently up 3.6% on the day. And with good reason, in my opinion, as the gamesmaker’s painful cost-cutting measures paves the way for solid earnings growth. The company’s products have a fierce following amongst fantasy lovers the world over, and with Games Workshop stepping up new product roll-outs I reckon the stage is set for revenues to gallop higher.
This view is shared by the City, and analysts expect the business to follow an 8% earnings rise in the year concluding May 2015 with extra advances in the region of 6% and 5% in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Consequently Games Workshop changes hands on a P/E rating of 12.4 times for the forthcoming year — comfortably below the value threshold of 15 times — and which drops to 11.8 times in 2017.
But it is in the dividend stakes where the niche gamebuilder really sets itself apart, and Games Workshop’s terrific cash generation is expected to drive an estimated payment of 32p per share for fiscal 2015 to 35p in 2016, and again to 40p the following year. As a result the company boasts enormous yields of 6.9% and 7.8% for 2016 and 2017 respectively.
I agree, that's what makes the Space Hulk limited edition so stupid. Lots of nostalgic gamers going into GW stores after 20 years to give Space Hulk a go only to be told it's sold out and not coming back.
Nostalgia has an impact, sure, but obviously not enough as most of the ex-gamers are still ex-gamers.
Would they be gamers if they could have bought that copy of Space Hulk? The barrier of entry for GWs games is far, far too high, very few people want to spend hundreds of pounds to paint dozens and dozens of models to play a game they enjoyed a decade ago.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Guildsman wrote: Household name? Every male in the West under 30?
Yes, and an exaggeration on my part but still GW's brands are highly recognisable.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/10 16:24:36
doktor_g wrote: This is from the Motley Fool UK site. From an article dated May 22. Discuss.
Games Workshop Group
Goblin emporium Games Workshop (LSE: GAW) is one of the leading chargers in Friday trade and was recently up 3.6% on the day. And with good reason, in my opinion, as the gamesmaker’s painful cost-cutting measures paves the way for solid earnings growth. The company’s products have a fierce following amongst fantasy lovers the world over, and with Games Workshop stepping up new product roll-outs I reckon the stage is set for revenues to gallop higher.
This view is shared by the City, and analysts expect the business to follow an 8% earnings rise in the year concluding May 2015 with extra advances in the region of 6% and 5% in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Consequently Games Workshop changes hands on a P/E rating of 12.4 times for the forthcoming year — comfortably below the value threshold of 15 times — and which drops to 11.8 times in 2017.
But it is in the dividend stakes where the niche gamebuilder really sets itself apart, and Games Workshop’s terrific cash generation is expected to drive an estimated payment of 32p per share for fiscal 2015 to 35p in 2016, and again to 40p the following year. As a result the company boasts enormous yields of 6.9% and 7.8% for 2016 and 2017 respectively.
Got a link?
Tried looking for "Games Workshop" on the site search and they've got nothing listed since last year.
doktor_g wrote: This is from the Motley Fool UK site. From an article dated May 22. Discuss.
Games Workshop Group
Goblin emporium Games Workshop (LSE: GAW) is one of the leading chargers in Friday trade and was recently up 3.6% on the day. And with good reason, in my opinion, as the gamesmaker’s painful cost-cutting measures paves the way for solid earnings growth. The company’s products have a fierce following amongst fantasy lovers the world over, and with Games Workshop stepping up new product roll-outs I reckon the stage is set for revenues to gallop higher.
This view is shared by the City, and analysts expect the business to follow an 8% earnings rise in the year concluding May 2015 with extra advances in the region of 6% and 5% in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Consequently Games Workshop changes hands on a P/E rating of 12.4 times for the forthcoming year — comfortably below the value threshold of 15 times — and which drops to 11.8 times in 2017.
But it is in the dividend stakes where the niche gamebuilder really sets itself apart, and Games Workshop’s terrific cash generation is expected to drive an estimated payment of 32p per share for fiscal 2015 to 35p in 2016, and again to 40p the following year. As a result the company boasts enormous yields of 6.9% and 7.8% for 2016 and 2017 respectively.
Got a link?
Tried looking for "Games Workshop" on the site search and they've got nothing listed since last year.
Investors are happy as long as GW keep paying out. The last dividend they declined resulted in a drastic drop in stock value. No one seems interested in the long term, only from one report to the next and will drop them like a hot potato once they aren't in a position to keep paying out.
doktor_g wrote: This is from the Motley Fool UK site. From an article dated May 22. Discuss.
Games Workshop Group
Goblin emporium Games Workshop (LSE: GAW) is one of the leading chargers in Friday trade and was recently up 3.6% on the day. And with good reason, in my opinion, as the gamesmaker’s painful cost-cutting measures paves the way for solid earnings growth. The company’s products have a fierce following amongst fantasy lovers the world over, and with Games Workshop stepping up new product roll-outs I reckon the stage is set for revenues to gallop higher.
This view is shared by the City, and analysts expect the business to follow an 8% earnings rise in the year concluding May 2015 with extra advances in the region of 6% and 5% in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Consequently Games Workshop changes hands on a P/E rating of 12.4 times for the forthcoming year — comfortably below the value threshold of 15 times — and which drops to 11.8 times in 2017.
But it is in the dividend stakes where the niche gamebuilder really sets itself apart, and Games Workshop’s terrific cash generation is expected to drive an estimated payment of 32p per share for fiscal 2015 to 35p in 2016, and again to 40p the following year. As a result the company boasts enormous yields of 6.9% and 7.8% for 2016 and 2017 respectively.
Got a link?
Tried looking for "Games Workshop" on the site search and they've got nothing listed since last year.
"I still think the IP is a bit overrated by the fans"
Fans have this idea that GW should fail so that someone else can pick up the IP (or the company as a whole) because it's such an awesome IP that surely someone would snap it up and turn it around.
I tend to disagree and think fans overestimate the value of the 40k to other companies. Even if they are the biggest fish in the wargaming world, they aren't a big fish in the wider picture of available IP's. Even The Witcher 3 sold many times more copies than GW has active customers, by at least an order of magnitude.
as can be seen by the sheer volume of GW licensed games that are coming out
Lets just be clear, the vast majority of "sheer volume" are just cheap throw away games that don't have the budget/quality/scope of the older THQ games like DoW or Space Marine.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/10 17:01:21
Motley Fool is focused entirely upon a return for investors SPECIFICALLY for a time frame set out of around two to five years.
And GW is CERTAINLY focused upon paying investors.
Also, Motley Fool has been wrong before about companies (several of their investors suggested Enron prior to its crash).
They are correct that GW will fork out dividends and see a growth in the value of their stock for at least two years.
But that is not predicated on the company lasting beyond those two years (the company could last, or it could wind up growing into oblivion, paying out dividends until it burns).
There is a difference between a company being a good investment and the company providing a decent product.
& 
