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.

 jah-joshua wrote:

what is wrong with buying GW products, if that is what you enjoy???

Um... I guess there're people who enjoy buying (usually women in the mall). I for one would rather get those GW products I want for free.

I just hope that his leaving helps with GW's recovery.

I am not sorry to see him go - I remember the Chapterhouse debacle all too weel. I just wish that MWHistorian had lived to see AM leave.

The Auld Grump

zedmeister wrote:
Indeed, how did they get it so wrong:

This is a good example of the shift GW underwent the last decade. Sure, there are certainly customers for whom price is no concern and the game doesn't matter, but that doesn't represent a large part of the base...*certainly* not enough to run the company. And if GW's goal was to move their games towards boutique sales for an even more niche audience, then they've been doing a great job. However, I believe that their goal (like all other companies) was always to make more money, and to that end they've been held back by management who look disdainfully at their customer base (something TSR was all too familiar with before their demise).

Anecdotally, I've read the he didn't sign off Forgeworld productions, but did act in an advisory fashion.

Indeed, how did they get it so wrong:

What is the source for these images?

Tiny Eye reports that the 2003 image shows up on a blog on July of 2010 and that's it.

I wonder if perhaps, with the change in attitude and personnel, GW would consider revisiting the Old World when AoS is solidified as a core system.

I know 30k doesn't work as a direct parallel, but maybe we'll live to see the new SGS come out with WFB Legacy somewhere down the line. A man can dream, I suppose.

A 10mm system set in the Old World would be fun...

 Azreal13 wrote:
A 10mm system set in the Old World would be fun...

You mean 8mm, because "its a good compromise between detail and scale" it only invalidates everything that has gone before completely by coincidence....

 Dryaktylus wrote:

 jah-joshua wrote:

what is wrong with buying GW products, if that is what you enjoy???

Um... I guess there're people who enjoy buying (usually women in the mall). I for one would rather get those GW products I want for free.

what a horrible insult to women everywhere...
i mean, women get more practical use out of the handbags, make-up, and shoes that they buy than i do out of my miniature collection
hahahahahahahaha

i get boatloads of free minis, thanks to years of painting for studios, but i still buy the cool stuff that i didn't get for free...
the thing is, minis go out of production all the time...
if i see something i really want, i buy it, or else i will have to hunt it down later...
even then, bargain hunting for rare minis is a fun hobby in itself...

regardless of the fact that Merett made himself look like an idiot in court, i am just glad that someone finally pushed the Genestealer Cult, Knights, and Deathwatch out the door...
if him leaving means that we get more cool stuff, than that can only be a good thing

cheers
jah

I just hope it's a step towards a better company. I haven't wanted to buy anything GW in over a year! I almost feel as if 40k doesn't exist anymore as a game, I've found myself so disinterested in it. Anything to move forward or create side games that I'd actually enjoy like Mordheim or Warmaster I'd love. I wonder if he had anything to do with those going away.

Alan is a pretty big deal in GW. If you read Kirby's preambles, when he discusses what it is that GW do, Alan sometimes gets a mention. He's the guy that understands GW's business, what it is they do, who their customers are, how to sell to them, and so on.

Pardon my quoting someone off the first page, but I think this sums up the root of GWs failings and implicates responsibility.

At a company of this size it's pretty much the CEO's job to have these insight and understanding and if what we saw over the last decade was Kirby's belief in what Alan Merett "knew" ... It's clear faith was misplaced. I think when Kirby was pushed out, they probably also decided Merett had to go but wanted to minimize the potential damage to investors by staggering their leadership departures.

I think this continued shake up in leadership is a positive change and only points to a greater influence by the newer CEO who appears to be turning things around.

If Matt Ward is taking this role I don't think it's a bad thing.

worst linkedin profile ever

https://www.linkedin.com/in/alan-merrett-413747104

 aka_mythos wrote:

Alan is a pretty big deal in GW. If you read Kirby's preambles, when he discusses what it is that GW do, Alan sometimes gets a mention. He's the guy that understands GW's business, what it is they do, who their customers are, how to sell to them, and so on.

Pardon my quoting someone off the first page, but I think this sums up the root of GWs failings and implicates responsibility.

At a company of this size it's pretty much the CEO's job to have these insight and understanding and if what we saw over the last decade was Kirby's belief in what Alan Merett "knew" ... It's clear faith was misplaced. I think when Kirby was pushed out, they probably also decided Merett had to go but wanted to minimize the potential damage to investors by staggering their leadership departures.

I think this continued shake up in leadership is a positive change and only points to a greater influence by the newer CEO who appears to be turning things around.

If Matt Ward is taking this role I don't think it's a bad thing.

kirby was "pushed out"? Source?

If it's true, good riddance. He's been the source of every quote that made me scratch my head over what GW is doing for some time now.

I've heard plenty of anecdotal evidence that he is/was a bit of a tyrant.
However, very much enjoying the "AM had a rigid fixed view of what GW should do, now he's gone maybe they can start meeting my fixed/rigid expectations!"

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

Alan is a pretty big deal in GW. If you read Kirby's preambles, when he discusses what it is that GW do, Alan sometimes gets a mention. He's the guy that understands GW's business, what it is they do, who their customers are, how to sell to them, and so on.

Pardon my quoting someone off the first page, but I think this sums up the root of GWs failings and implicates responsibility.

At a company of this size it's pretty much the CEO's job to have these insight and understanding and if what we saw over the last decade was Kirby's belief in what Alan Merett "knew" ... It's clear faith was misplaced. I think when Kirby was pushed out, they probably also decided Merett had to go but wanted to minimize the potential damage to investors by staggering their leadership departures.

I think this continued shake up in leadership is a positive change and only points to a greater influence by the newer CEO who appears to be turning things around.

If Matt Ward is taking this role I don't think it's a bad thing.

kirby was "pushed out"? Source?

Kirby was CEO and now he is a "non-executive" on the board of directors. When he "resigned," GW's statement to investors said he would "continue to chair board meetings." The rumor coming from back in February-ish of last year: there was a person claiming that according to top people he knew at GW the board and the new CEO had been intentionally holding board meetings when Kirby was "unavailable". In general a company can't truly "fire" or force out someone who owns as much stock as Kirby, but this is what it looks like when they "push" them out and hope they get the message that the company business will happen around them and not through their participating leadership.

 aka_mythos wrote:

Alan is a pretty big deal in GW. If you read Kirby's preambles, when he discusses what it is that GW do, Alan sometimes gets a mention. He's the guy that understands GW's business, what it is they do, who their customers are, how to sell to them, and so on.

Pardon my quoting someone off the first page, but I think this sums up the root of GWs failings and implicates responsibility.

At a company of this size it's pretty much the CEO's job to have these insight and understanding and if what we saw over the last decade was Kirby's belief in what Alan Merett "knew" ... It's clear faith was misplaced. I think when Kirby was pushed out, they probably also decided Merett had to go but wanted to minimize the potential damage to investors by staggering their leadership departures.

I think this continued shake up in leadership is a positive change and only points to a greater influence by the newer CEO who appears to be turning things around.

If Matt Ward is taking this role I don't think it's a bad thing.

I didn't mean to give the impression that Kirby himself did not understand GW's business, or that he left that up to Alan. As best as I can tell they were of the same mind.

Albino Squirrel wrote:
I agree with you, Jah. I don't understand why this gets brought up over and over again as an example of how horrible Merett is. If this forum is anything to go buy, he's completely right. The hobby is buying more and more miniatures. It's especially obviously now. Games Workshop has gone back to making all kinds of games, like Betrayal at Calth and Deathwatch: Overkill. And I read posts on here all the time from people who didn't even consider even reading the rules for those games, and just bought them for the fancy new miniatures. They even act like the game is pointless filler, and that it's really just a box full of miniatures. The hobby is, for a lot of people, collecting the miniatures. That's what people enjoy. So why hate the guy for knowing what his customers are like?

OR that they are bought, shock horror, for ANOTHER game...

When you can have same models for the game for 150£ or 100£? Obviously 100£ regardless of does it have ANOTHER game or not.

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

Alan is a pretty big deal in GW. If you read Kirby's preambles, when he discusses what it is that GW do, Alan sometimes gets a mention. He's the guy that understands GW's business, what it is they do, who their customers are, how to sell to them, and so on.

Pardon my quoting someone off the first page, but I think this sums up the root of GWs failings and implicates responsibility.

At a company of this size it's pretty much the CEO's job to have these insight and understanding and if what we saw over the last decade was Kirby's belief in what Alan Merett "knew" ... It's clear faith was misplaced. I think when Kirby was pushed out, they probably also decided Merett had to go but wanted to minimize the potential damage to investors by staggering their leadership departures.

I think this continued shake up in leadership is a positive change and only points to a greater influence by the newer CEO who appears to be turning things around.

If Matt Ward is taking this role I don't think it's a bad thing.

kirby was "pushed out"? Source?

Kirby was CEO and now he is a "non-executive" on the board of directors. When he "resigned," GW's statement to investors said he would "continue to chair board meetings." The rumor coming from back in February-ish of last year: there was a person claiming that according to top people he knew at GW the board and the new CEO had been intentionally holding board meetings when Kirby was "unavailable". In general a company can't truly "fire" or force out someone who owns as much stock as Kirby, but this is what it looks like when they "push" them out and hope they get the message that the company business will happen around them and not through their participating leadership.

Sounds like a whole lotta wishlisting to me.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

Alan is a pretty big deal in GW. If you read Kirby's preambles, when he discusses what it is that GW do, Alan sometimes gets a mention. He's the guy that understands GW's business, what it is they do, who their customers are, how to sell to them, and so on.

Pardon my quoting someone off the first page, but I think this sums up the root of GWs failings and implicates responsibility.

At a company of this size it's pretty much the CEO's job to have these insight and understanding and if what we saw over the last decade was Kirby's belief in what Alan Merett "knew" ... It's clear faith was misplaced. I think when Kirby was pushed out, they probably also decided Merett had to go but wanted to minimize the potential damage to investors by staggering their leadership departures.

I think this continued shake up in leadership is a positive change and only points to a greater influence by the newer CEO who appears to be turning things around.

If Matt Ward is taking this role I don't think it's a bad thing.

kirby was "pushed out"? Source?

Kirby was CEO and now he is a "non-executive" on the board of directors. When he "resigned," GW's statement to investors said he would "continue to chair board meetings." The rumor coming from back in February-ish of last year: there was a person claiming that according to top people he knew at GW the board and the new CEO had been intentionally holding board meetings when Kirby was "unavailable". In general a company can't truly "fire" or force out someone who owns as much stock as Kirby, but this is what it looks like when they "push" them out and hope they get the message that the company business will happen around them and not through their participating leadership.

Sounds like a whole lotta wishlisting to me.

Sounds like a whole lotta accuracy to me judging by all the changes of the last few months.

Well, people will try and read what they want into things.

Does this mean dumb reskinned names of armies and units will finally die? I.e. Astra Miliatarum, Helbrutes, etc.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Does this mean dumb reskinned names of armies and units will finally die? I.e. Astra Miliatarum, Helbrutes, etc.

To some degree, yes. I have to say though, I like the names Astra Militarum/Tempestus.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
I just hope that his leaving helps with GW's recovery.

I am not sorry to see him go - I remember the Chapterhouse debacle all too weel. I just wish that MWHistorian had lived to see AM leave.

The Auld Grump

Off topic but:

I thought I'd not seen him for a while. When did that happen?

January.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/676742.page

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
Kirby was CEO and now he is a "non-executive" on the board of directors. When he "resigned," GW's statement to investors said he would "continue to chair board meetings." The rumor coming from back in February-ish of last year: there was a person claiming that according to top people he knew at GW the board and the new CEO had been intentionally holding board meetings when Kirby was "unavailable". In general a company can't truly "fire" or force out someone who owns as much stock as Kirby, but this is what it looks like when they "push" them out and hope they get the message that the company business will happen around them and not through their participating leadership.

Sounds like a whole lotta wishlisting to me.

Sentence #1 - Fact; Sentence #2 - Fact; Sentence #3 - Rumor, supposition; Sentence #4 - Conclusion, comparison
Generally a "wishlist" has to contain an enumeration of desires. This is not that.

 russian69hitman wrote:
worst linkedin profile ever

https://www.linkedin.com/in/alan-merrett-413747104

I don't know anything about Linkedin. It still says he works there. How often does this get updated?

It's like FB, it has to be updated by the account holder.

Davor wrote:

 russian69hitman wrote:
worst linkedin profile ever

https://www.linkedin.com/in/alan-merrett-413747104

I don't know anything about Linkedin. It still says he works there. How often does this get updated?

As often as you update it. It's like a "professional" Facebook page. A social media resume.

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
Kirby was CEO and now he is a "non-executive" on the board of directors. When he "resigned," GW's statement to investors said he would "continue to chair board meetings." The rumor coming from back in February-ish of last year: there was a person claiming that according to top people he knew at GW the board and the new CEO had been intentionally holding board meetings when Kirby was "unavailable". In general a company can't truly "fire" or force out someone who owns as much stock as Kirby, but this is what it looks like when they "push" them out and hope they get the message that the company business will happen around them and not through their participating leadership.

Sounds like a whole lotta wishlisting to me.

Sentence #1 - Fact; Sentence #2 - Fact; Sentence #3 - Rumor, supposition; Sentence #4 - Conclusion, comparison
Generally a "wishlist" has to contain an enumeration of desires. This is not that.

Rumours, claims.......nothing concrete then, just wishlisting and a desire to see the great satan apparently "pushed out" by the saviour of GW.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
Kirby was CEO and now he is a "non-executive" on the board of directors. When he "resigned," GW's statement to investors said he would "continue to chair board meetings." The rumor coming from back in February-ish of last year: there was a person claiming that according to top people he knew at GW the board and the new CEO had been intentionally holding board meetings when Kirby was "unavailable". In general a company can't truly "fire" or force out someone who owns as much stock as Kirby, but this is what it looks like when they "push" them out and hope they get the message that the company business will happen around them and not through their participating leadership.

Sounds like a whole lotta wishlisting to me.

Sentence #1 - Fact; Sentence #2 - Fact; Sentence #3 - Rumor, supposition; Sentence #4 - Conclusion, comparison
Generally a "wishlist" has to contain an enumeration of desires. This is not that.

Rumours, claims.......nothing concrete then, just wishlisting and a desire to see the great satan apparently "pushed out" by the saviour of GW.

You do check to see which forum you're in before you post, aye?

Well, I don't know much about the inner workings of GW. I never really cared. I do know I was more into the hobby when I felt like I knew who some of the developers and painters were thru White Dwarf. And by this I mean the old days when Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson did their battle reports. I never have gone to a Games Day, and I might have been to a single GW store, and I am not even sure. I know a new one opened up near me but I don't see the point of going since I can see it all online.

Over the years, and I got into the hobby starting with Adeptus Titanicus and Space Marine in 91, I have seen GW do some pretty impressive things, and some dumb things too. But I am not at GW HQ looking over the numbers and having any idea what it takes to develop a game, and so on, in relation to the budgets they have work with. I also think that much of the criticism seems to originate around the time of the Great Recession, when GW no doubt was forced to make some changes. Their old guard probably just kept on going thru with whatever they decided back then, rather than change with the times I guess.

I do remember a time when I saw the developers engaged with the community, and even posting on forums like this one. When Jervis posted he was going to start EpicA, I emailed him directly and got a response, which let to a whole series of exchanges. I am not sure that would happen today. And I am sure not all exchanges and posts of criticism go over well either, so I can see why they might pull back too.

But GW seemed to need to make some changes and it seems they are slowly getting rid of everything thats been wrong with GW the last 10 years and righting the ship. Rome wasn't built in a day. I am glad to see GW releasing more games, even if they are all directly under 40k for now, because thats what they are supposed to be doing to me. I got so bored with the only thing coming out of GW was a new version of 40k or WFB.

Some things they have done right. I love the old school models, but I never dreamed that they would be releasing plastic models with the detail they have, or even build Stompas and the like for 40k. The rules suck, but the models are amazing.

Hopefully they bring back the GW where the fans and the company felt like community. And I hope they bring back WFB and dump AoS. They dont even need to come up with an explanation. Just show up with WFB v10.