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.

Let's focus on the financials, not other posters - thanks guys

Baron Klatz wrote:
@Hulksmash,

Well said, sir!

From what I've seen GW's profits are better than the last five years, AoS is stated by insider sources to be 30% of their profit and one fellow calculated the combined royalties from the last report to be only 1/6 the profit.

I don't know why it's success is such a argued case, it's a fun and easy to get into game with amazing models and constant support and company feedback.

If that failed then there's no hope for any TT game.

 shinros wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
GW killing off 30 years of WHFB right before the release of its biggest ever licensed game has to be the most idiotic decision that it ever made.

It would be easy to roll back as well.

Now? I disagree around the time it came out? Yes.

Indeed, by the time they'd be able to bring it back TW:W would be over and the hype gone anyway.

You just merge the remaining production models to their WHFB faction and into to the old system. Put out for example 8th edition ( what is already written ) back on the store shelves? You think that they couldnt do this in a matter of months, if they wanted to?
Do you also think that the squatted minis dont have a CAD file or whatever on computer so they can remake the molds?

Or just have it ready for TW:W II.

herjan1987 wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
@Hulksmash,

Well said, sir!

From what I've seen GW's profits are better than the last five years, AoS is stated by insider sources to be 30% of their profit and one fellow calculated the combined royalties from the last report to be only 1/6 the profit.

I don't know why it's success is such a argued case, it's a fun and easy to get into game with amazing models and constant support and company feedback.

If that failed then there's no hope for any TT game.

 shinros wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
GW killing off 30 years of WHFB right before the release of its biggest ever licensed game has to be the most idiotic decision that it ever made.

It would be easy to roll back as well.

Now? I disagree around the time it came out? Yes.

Indeed, by the time they'd be able to bring it back TW:W would be over and the hype gone anyway.

You just merge the remaining production models to their WHFB faction and into to the old system. Put out for example 8th edition ( what is already written ) back on the store shelves? You think that they couldnt do this in a matter of months, if they wanted to?
Do you also think that the squatted minis dont have a CAD file or whatever on computer so they can remake the molds?

You have to think in the context of shelf space cost with the new AOS releases and relaunching everything that costs money and if GW and AOS is doing well why would GW be inclined to do it? Also the fact of pissing everyone off again which I doubt GW would like to risk again. Why do you think in 40k they keep hammering on it's not the end times!! When someone even breathes a word of it? Even on the twitch steam? In my opinion total war warhammer replicates whfb far better than the table top and is much more balanced.

I dunno if I was a shareholder I would be wondering why GW would go back to the thing that did not sell over the thing that is selling.

To "roll back" though GW would have to stop productions and schedules they have going that have been laid out for the coming years and try to keep the fanbase happy with a proper in-lore justification of the changes.

That's what would take a few years to accomplish.

Then there's having to compete with the systems and companies that sprung up to fill the void they left which is another big issue.

Easier to continue AoS and just add some Old World charm to the setting like they did with Hammerhal.

I haven't gotten into TW:W yet but when I do my head-canon is I'm battling for new established kingdoms in the beast realm. Anything from Wfb can easily fit into AoS.

Just one more thing. Although I dont check the AoS models regularly, because I am not a big fan of them, but I can tell you that the Empire pistoliers, Karl Franz on Deathclaw, Empire Archers and the Island of Blood/Dawn of Spire kits are often sold out.
Till today I failed to see any Sigmarine kit to be out of stock.n With the exception when they repacked them.

herjan1987 wrote:
Just one more thing. Although I dont check the AoS models regularly, because I am not a big fan of them, but I can tell you that the Empire pistoliers, Karl Franz on Deathclaw, Empire Archers and the Island of Blood/Dawn of Spire kits are often sold out.
Till today I failed to see any Sigmarine kit to be out of stock.n With the exception when they repacked them.

*sigh* Just stop already please...

I saw alot of the new Vanguard out of stock.

Alot of 8th stuff that didn't sell is also going out faster because AoS made alot of models more effective than 8th did. Lord Kroak for example hardly ever moved before AoS.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Or just have it ready for TW:W II.

I was actually think it'd take till TW:W 3 around 2020. The planning for AoS started around 2012 and the starter set was made in 2013 so these big changes take about 3 years.

Baron Klatz wrote:
I saw alot of the new Vanguard out of stock.

Alot of 8th stuff that didn't sell is also going out faster because AoS made alot of models more effective than 8th did. Lord Kroak for example hardly ever moved before AoS.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Or just have it ready for TW:W II.

I was actually think it'd take till TW:W 3 around 2020. The planning for AoS started around 2012 and the starter set was made in 2013 so these big changes take about 3 years.

Baron I dont say that 8th is best thing since sliced bread. What I say is that there little reason to providing support to game that existed for 30 years, if its going to get a AAA game developer to make a game out of it. Hell I can see AoS like system to be a gateway game to WHFB. And no. these are not big changes! If you add something to an already existing thing, what you sold before hand then that a far less work, when you need to build it from sratch.

Also when did you saw them out of stock on release? We can safely say that GW tends to make less stuff on release so it wont be collecting dust. A perfect example is the Stormcast limited edition battletome. 300 copies come on...

herjan1987 wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
I saw alot of the new Vanguard out of stock.

Alot of 8th stuff that didn't sell is also going out faster because AoS made alot of models more effective than 8th did. Lord Kroak for example hardly ever moved before AoS.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Or just have it ready for TW:W II.

I was actually think it'd take till TW:W 3 around 2020. The planning for AoS started around 2012 and the starter set was made in 2013 so these big changes take about 3 years.

Baron I dont say that 8th is best thing since sliced bread. What I say is that there little reason to providing support to game that existed for 30 years, if its going to get a AAA game developer to make a game out of it. Hell I can see AoS like system to be a gateway game to WHFB.

Problem is GW is a public company and if what hulk said is true and my manager who I am good friends with has also told me tactical's out sold the whfb range of course said company will do something about it. In my opinion by large they don't care about our feelings or if some people liked reading the story on the internet(they are not actually customers GW don't care about them at all). The reality is GW rebooted it to salvage it and it had a hard launch but it's working now. Case example Duncan is doing all those painting videos to help us but at the end of the day those videos are also there to sell paints that's the cold hard truth.

GW has no reason as a company to spend money bringing it back, if they DO bring it back I can easily see forge world doing it, but it's not going to be their "flagship" fantasy game anymore it's not going to happen.

"Shrug" CA are really bad with time schedules and GW didn't want to keep 8th around which was sinking fast just to gamble that CA would make another Rome 2/ Empire game around 2017.

It's bringing in people into AoS anyway as most are fascinated with the armies rather than the setting so I can't see why they need to gear-shift now.

Just make Bretonnian/Tomb king-like armies and they're good.

[Edit]: Why would they make less stuff just on release? Cutting back stock would seem to be a all around strategy to me.

That the other older AoS releases also still go out of stock at times kinda balances out this argument anyway.

Baron Klatz wrote:
"Shrug" CA are really bad with time schedules and GW didn't want to keep 8th around which was sinking fast just to gamble that CA would make another Rome 2/ Empire game around 2017.

It's bringing in people into AoS anyway as most are fascinated with the armies rather than the setting so I can't see why they need to gear-shift now.

Just make Bretonnian/Tomb king-like armies and they're good.

I don't know how it is in other places but I had plenty of people come into my local store who have only played the game and wanted to know what's going on I literally tell them that canonically archaon win's that conflict destroys the world, new worlds are recreated and they do it all over again. Then I point out that archaon got an upgrade and they start eyeing up his new mini. If they ask any more questions I answer them and it normally ends with "Huh it's not that bad compared to what people have told me on the internet."

Some take the plunge some don't but most people are not raging in real life like how they are on the internet. People generally don't take things that seriously.

Indeed, alot of new-comers on the forums and Reddit are the same. The Grombindal sale tactic also got alot of stories of TW:W players going into GW stores and walking out with AoS forces and actually enjoying the game once they tried it.

 Azreal13 wrote:


I pick an arbitrary number out of thin air, to demonstrate how vague "better than WHFB" is as a statement (and a point that's been made repeatedly since everyone wanting to defend AOS jumped on it) and you take that as some sort of serious assertion that AOS
comprises 5.1% of revenue?

Read what I write, not what you read.

Sigh...The 5.1% was mostly a joke of showing the silliness of the position of asserting AoS isn't selling decently. Name another time in since the LOTR bubble that profits reached previous years profit (exceeded significantly once you take out royalties) in the first 6 months. You can't. What changed? No new editions were released (normal reason for massive sales bump). Just looking around you can see AoS GT's in the US and UK starting to take off in that 6 months (UK in particular). A popular release they had trouble keeping in stock (Sylvaneth) for AoS. An AoS summer campaign. Several solid 40k releases and two huge ones Genestealer Cult & BoP (If we're counting boardgames and I'm not sure Magnus actually made it but if he did it was pre-orders only). Oh and Bloodbowl.

It gets old reading over and over again from the same posters pedantic statements about the size of sales or trying to cut down how well AoS is actually doing. You and the same others are correct. We don't know the exact numbers that AoS accounts for. However we do know that GW is saying it's selling better than Fantasy has in years. We are seeing what looks to be the first year that they are going to profit and actually INCREASED unit sales. We're seeing large events for AoS showing up all over the place in the US and UK. That's non-anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence is whatever people want it to be honestly. Your insistence on being contrary just to be contrary do get wearisome.

herjan1987 wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
I saw alot of the new Vanguard out of stock.

Alot of 8th stuff that didn't sell is also going out faster because AoS made alot of models more effective than 8th did. Lord Kroak for example hardly ever moved before AoS.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Or just have it ready for TW:W II.

I was actually think it'd take till TW:W 3 around 2020. The planning for AoS started around 2012 and the starter set was made in 2013 so these big changes take about 3 years.

Baron I dont say that 8th is best thing since sliced bread. What I say is that there little reason to providing support to game that existed for 30 years, if its going to get a AAA game developer to make a game out of it. Hell I can see AoS like system to be a gateway game to WHFB. And no. these are not big changes! If you add something to an already existing thing, what you sold before hand then that a far less work, when you need to build it from sratch.

Also when did you saw them out of stock on release? We can safely say that GW tends to make less stuff on release so it wont be collecting dust. A perfect example is the Stormcast limited edition battletome. 300 copies come on...

I'd be beter to go back to 6th and port in the new units. I'd hit it.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 shinros wrote:
Stuff

GW doesn't publish its sales data so only GW really know how well AoS is doing. Anonymous financial analysis or not.

Exactly, this guy sounds like he tries way too hard to look smart, but at the end of the day, he just pulls a whole lot of assumptions out of his ass. We do know that AoS is selling better than Fantasy (are we even talking constant $ ???), but how much is due to Warhammer Quest, BloodBowl, Last Chance to Buy, Discount Bundles, Impact of Total War, Roundtree management over Kirby,... ???

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:


I pick an arbitrary number out of thin air, to demonstrate how vague "better than WHFB" is as a statement (and a point that's been made repeatedly since everyone wanting to defend AOS jumped on it) and you take that as some sort of serious assertion that AOS
comprises 5.1% of revenue?

Read what I write, not what you read.

Sigh...The 5.1% was mostly a joke of showing the silliness of the position of asserting AoS isn't selling decently. Name another time in since the LOTR bubble that profits reached previous years profit (exceeded significantly once you take out royalties) in the first 6 months. You can't. What changed? No new editions were released (normal reason for massive sales bump). Just looking around you can see AoS GT's in the US and UK starting to take off in that 6 months (UK in particular). A popular release they had trouble keeping in stock (Sylvaneth) for AoS. An AoS summer campaign. Several solid 40k releases and two huge ones Genestealer Cult & BoP (If we're counting boardgames and I'm not sure Magnus actually made it but if he did it was pre-orders only). Oh and Bloodbowl.

It gets old reading over and over again from the same posters pedantic statements about the size of sales or trying to cut down how well AoS is actually doing. You and the same others are correct. We don't know the exact numbers that AoS accounts for. However we do know that GW is saying it's selling better than Fantasy has in years. We are seeing what looks to be the first year that they are going to profit and actually INCREASED unit sales. We're seeing large events for AoS showing up all over the place in the US and UK. That's non-anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence is whatever people want it to be honestly. Your insistence on being contrary just to be contrary do get wearisome.

While I don't care either way on the AoS argument, blood bowl surprising them with its popularity sounds like it was massive.

 shinros wrote:

GW has no reason as a company to spend money bringing it back

Warhammer:total War has sold over 1.3 million copies (source)and there are 2 more games in the series which will almost certainly sell 1 million+ units each. That's a HUGE number of potential customers that GW has nothing to offer.

That's an extremely good reason to spend some money on bringing back Warhammer.

I believe a fun fantasy game that has rules for all their TW:W armies and the models for most of them while giving them a reasonable entry barrier doesn't count as "nothing to offer".

Mr. CyberPunk wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 shinros wrote:
Stuff

GW doesn't publish its sales data so only GW really know how well AoS is doing. Anonymous financial analysis or not.

Exactly, this guy looks like another idiot who tries way too hard to sound smart but who, at the end of the day, just pulls a whole lot of assumptions out of his ass. We do know that AoS is selling better than Fantasy (are we even talking constant $ ???), but how much is due to Warhammer Quest, BloodBowl, Last Chance to Buy, Discount Bundles, Impact of Total War, Roundtree management over Kirby,... ???

First, please don't insult my friend.

Second, while I'll agree Rountree's leadership is a massive reason for the increased profits, wouldn't the things you mention basically be categorized as AoS, Bloodbowl and 40k's overall profits?

The royalties from the games already served their purpose as a one-time shot in the arm for their profits, which was good as GW spent alot of money on new machinery. Now they're around 1/6 of the profits GW gets.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 shinros wrote:

GW has no reason as a company to spend money bringing it back

Warhammer:total War has sold over 1.3 million copies (source)and there are 2 more games in the series which will almost certainly sell 1 million+ units each. That's a HUGE number of potential customers that GW has nothing to offer.

That's an extremely good reason to spend some money on bringing back Warhammer.

The money from Sega is money for nothing.

If the agreement includes royalties from the sequels to be produced then it is probable that they have 'shots in the arm' bi annually up to 2020/22.

Warhammer already exists in AOS and the synergy is there already. Play a rank and file game on PC then play the table top version which allows smaller games.

And I actually doubt the supposed surge in players flocking to GW to buy the TTG.

Baron Klatz wrote:


First, please don't insult my friend.

Second, while I'll agree Rountree's leadership is a massive reason for the increased profits, wouldn't the things you mention basically be categorized as AoS, Bloodbowl and 40k's overall profits?

You're right, there was no need for that and I've edited my post, though I was throwing it around mainly for shock value since I didn't consider he, or someone he knew, was posting here (and also because we, economists, usually hate on finance guy's since they usually dismiss the context casually)

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Have a look at their Forum. Dead as a doornail.

Mind, I suppose that's what happens when you repeatedly ban the trolled rather than the troll.

That happens around here as well, and the forum is still quite vibrant - I don't think that's the problem


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 shinros wrote:

GW has no reason as a company to spend money bringing it back

Warhammer:total War has sold over 1.3 million copies (source)and there are 2 more games in the series which will almost certainly sell 1 million+ units each. That's a HUGE number of potential customers that GW has nothing to offer.

That's an extremely good reason to spend some money on bringing back Warhammer.

Actually they have AoS to offer these customers, a game which has shown it's easy to pick up.

They could sell them warmaster though....

I would soooo love a return to Warmaster!

That'd be a better fit for TW fans anyway than the older editions since there would be no elite unit/monster spams but just large armies going at it while keeping your heroes in a good command position without getting killed.

You're right, there was no need for that and I've edited my post,

Thank you, there's enough bile on the internet without needing to drag it into a forum for discussing hobbies.

 shinros wrote:
Problem is GW is a public company and if what hulk said is true and my manager who I am good friends with has also told me tactical's out sold the whfb range of course said company will do something about it. In my opinion by large they don't care about our feelings or if some people liked reading the story on the internet(they are not actually customers GW don't care about them at all). The reality is GW rebooted it to salvage it and it had a hard launch but it's working now. Case example Duncan is doing all those painting videos to help us but at the end of the day those videos are also there to sell paints that's the cold hard truth.

GW has no reason as a company to spend money bringing it back, if they DO bring it back I can easily see forge world doing it, but it's not going to be their "flagship" fantasy game anymore it's not going to happen.

Problem is GW thinks not selling like space marines is automatically bad. Nevermind it's still top-3 game selling in the world. But nope. That sells badly. By GW logic there's just one game in the whole world that was selling well.

Then they cut off support killing off number of new releases. No new releases=not much sales since sales comes mostly from new releases than old kits that have sold most of what they will sell within few months.

Even if two lines would sell identically have 10 new releases for line A than line B and line A will sell AT LEAST 10 times as much in that year.

Mr. CyberPunk wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 shinros wrote:
Stuff

GW doesn't publish its sales data so only GW really know how well AoS is doing. Anonymous financial analysis or not.

Exactly, this guy sounds like he tries way too hard to look smart, but at the end of the day, he just pulls a whole lot of assumptions out of his ass. We do know that AoS is selling better than Fantasy (are we even talking constant $ ???), but how much is due to Warhammer Quest, BloodBowl, Last Chance to Buy, Discount Bundles, Impact of Total War, Roundtree management over Kirby,... ???

Hmm? I am not smart at all you would see in this very thread that I have outright said I don't have a head for these things the reason why I use that analysis since said person took time to do a whole run down of the report the reason why I use it because going by bolter and chainsword everyone mostly agreed with it and appreciated the analysis and two because it's a 40k forum so we can't talk about being biased to AOS.

If someone from AOS did it I would not link it since highly likely it would be subjective, I mean if you want to analyze the previous report and give us a run down of what's going on I would be more than happy to see it. Also I am not trying hard to appear smart all I type is what makes sense to me or what is logical to me. If it appears that I am being a smartass to you then my apologies? What he put there makes sense and largely matches up with what Hulk has just said recently.

What we know.

GW's takings are on the up across the board. All sales channels are up (direct, store and 3rd Party). This naturally leads to greater profits, as reflected.

Licensing Revenues are also up.

What we've been told by third party sources.

GW is pleasantly surprised with the uptake of AoS, Bloodbowl, Quest etc. One figure bandied about from a managers meeting (came out just after one, which lends veracity) is that AoS accounts for 30% of sales).

What we do not know

Any official breakdown of what sells and what doesn't, on account GW don't release that info.

I think that pretty much sums it up, yes?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
What we know.

GW's takings are on the up across the board. All sales channels are up (direct, store and 3rd Party). This naturally leads to greater profits, as reflected.

Licensing Revenues are also up.

What we've been told by third party sources.

GW is pleasantly surprised with the uptake of AoS, Bloodbowl, Quest etc. One figure bandied about from a managers meeting (came out just after one, which lends veracity) is that AoS accounts for 30% of sales).

What we do not know

Any official breakdown of what sells and what doesn't, on account GW don't release that info.

I think that pretty much sums it up, yes?

That sounds about right.

tneva82 wrote:

 shinros wrote:
Problem is GW is a public company and if what hulk said is true and my manager who I am good friends with has also told me tactical's out sold the whfb range of course said company will do something about it. In my opinion by large they don't care about our feelings or if some people liked reading the story on the internet(they are not actually customers GW don't care about them at all). The reality is GW rebooted it to salvage it and it had a hard launch but it's working now. Case example Duncan is doing all those painting videos to help us but at the end of the day those videos are also there to sell paints that's the cold hard truth.

GW has no reason as a company to spend money bringing it back, if they DO bring it back I can easily see forge world doing it, but it's not going to be their "flagship" fantasy game anymore it's not going to happen.

Problem is GW thinks not selling like space marines is automatically bad. Nevermind it's still top-3 game selling in the world. But nope. That sells badly. By GW logic there's just one game in the whole world that was selling well.

Then they cut off support killing off number of new releases. No new releases=not much sales since sales comes mostly from new releases than old kits that have sold most of what they will sell within few months.

Even if two lines would sell identically have 10 new releases for line A than line B aknd line A will sell AT LEAST 10 times as much in that year.

Except this didn't happen. Even when fully supported and they were releasing new armies the entire wfb range wasn't outselling a 40k army. It only got worse from there. My understanding from people I trust is that even when they were still producing for 8th edition that sales had already dipped to single digits. The stopping g of support while they worked on AoS and doubled down on 40k didn't drop the numbers but a precent age point or two. In this instance it's a fallacy that if gw had supported wfb more it would have survived. It had a lot of baggage.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
What we know.

GW's takings are on the up across the board. All sales channels are up (direct, store and 3rd Party). This naturally leads to greater profits, as reflected.

Licensing Revenues are also up.

What we've been told by third party sources.

GW is pleasantly surprised with the uptake of AoS, Bloodbowl, Quest etc. One figure bandied about from a managers meeting (came out just after one, which lends veracity) is that AoS accounts for 30% of sales).

What we do not know

Any official breakdown of what sells and what doesn't, on account GW don't release that info.

I think that pretty much sums it up, yes?

Yep. Anything else is just wishful thinking. Including the notion that GW would bring back WHFB because a video game in the setting sold well, when we have no evidence of the crossover potential between the mediums, or that those who would crossover would care if the setting was WHFB or AoS (models are mostly the same, it's still fantasy), and taking into account that trying to supporting three big game systems that all require big releases and lots of attention is doomed to fail (unless you think they would cancel AoS, which is ludicrous at this point)... there's no way it would happen. They might do Mordheim though, that would be nice.

Baron Klatz wrote:I believe a fun...

Matter of opinion.

...fantasy game...

A broad term.

...that has rules for all their TW:W armies...

Even if they think the rules might be fun, they bear no resemblance to the computer game they've been playing. To say nothing of the background.

...and the models for most of them...

Whoop de doo.

...while giving them a reasonable entry barrier doesn't count as "nothing to offer".

The 'reasonable entry barrier' might sound like a good thing compared to 8th ed's 'buy and paint this massive expensive army before you think of playing' schtick, but I don't know if it means much when it seems that standard AoS armies require almost the same number of minis, and expense. What you see as 'a reasonable entry barrier', others could see as 'a hook for the marks'.

Overall, AoS is not the game that most TW players will expect or want if they come looking for the physical version of their game. I'd say they'll view it in the same way as WFB fans: the block manoeuvre is gone; the world is gone; a chunk of the mini range is gone; the remaining range are largely hangers-on, all but unwanted afterthoughts stuck in a different context and given excruciating 'comedy' rules in place of what strategy and tactics there were. You might have convinced yourself that AoS is the best game ever and a logical development of WFB, but others with no idea of the history and reasons for it are going to look at it as a completely different thing, just with the same GW logo. They'll come to find chess and they'll find snakes 'n' ladders instead. Snakes 'n ladders played with leftover knight and bishop pieces...

I've seen my fair share of instances of GW hhhobbyists complaining about GW games but refusing to look at other, perfectly good games and rules because they're not exactly like a GW game. The minis (if they even need new minis) are different; there's no micromanagement; there's no convoluted process; there's no untidy heap of special rules with a sign stuck in it saying 'This is fluffy. Honest.' And so on. I know how it goes. And now there'll be heaps of gamers ignoring the GW fanboy's game of choice... maybe not for the same motivation or details, but for the same reason (arguably better justified, too): it's not the same as what they're used to. In their eyes, GW will have 'nothing to offer' them.

I do get a bit of enjoyment from the irony, I have to admit.