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.

 Azreal13 wrote:

What do you know? Rountree agreed, they've changed in several key areas, and things have changed. I happen to think they've kicked a few cans down the road and there are still challenges in their medium term, but show me a company that isn't true of.

I was wrong about Rountree. I figured that he was a corporate climber first and only and didn't really have the needed skills to turn things around. It can be a common occurrence in the accounting community that the successful don't stay at one company for their whole career. Most senior accountants come from outside (they get head hunted, start their own firms, have disagreements with management and go elsewhere) whereas Rountree started his accounting program while at GW, did his work experience there, stayed there and climbed all the way to the top. And then did things that worked. I honestly thought he was another yes-man who would just do a version of Mark Well's and Kirby's plan of "just cut costs and raise prices and never talk to the customers unless they pay to hear from us in a publication."

I am pleasantly surprised.

Meh, I always figured his background and the various departments he'd managed meant he was far more likely to understand the actual business. He may have started in accounting but he ran BL when it was at it's most profitable and he helped grow FW when he ran that. Not to mention he actually ran the specialist games and so understood that portion of the business too (that portion that died with the LotR bubble as the first casualty of "budget cuts").

But I'm glad the culture and the general attitude toward GW has shifted more positive and is building more momentum with every release.

Reinholt was a poster over on Warseer back in the day who was consistently predicting their demise in the medium and long term. Essentially saying it was too late to turn it around and the rot had gone too far His posts were reasoned, articulate and intelligent and to a layman his arguments made sense. I believe he worked on Wall Street in some capacity. I've seen him floating around on SW Armada land.

Not to knock the guy but nice if he re-surfaced and gave his view now.

Replicant253 wrote:
Reinholt was a poster over on Warseer back in the day who was consistently predicting their demise in the medium and long term. Essentially saying it was too late to turn it around and the rot had gone too far His posts were reasoned, articulate and intelligent and to a layman his arguments made sense. I believe he worked on Wall Street in some capacity. I've seen him floating around on SW Armada land.

Not to knock the guy but nice if he re-surfaced and gave his view now.

Not related to Reinholt as a poster, but the Drivelmeisters of BoLS have been conspicuous in their absence ever since the financials improved....

Mind you, I can remember in the dim and distant past of Dakka, posters claiming GW must have been cooking the books every time their own doom mongering was proven wrong....

I don't get all the "Aha! All the people saying there were problems with GW's financials have shut up now there are no longer problems with GW's financials!". Especially when immediately followed with remarks about how some people who used to express such concerns wouldn't shut up even if proven wrong.

Those are pretty much the only two options when a complaint no longer has any basis - stop making it, or ignore reality and keep making it. Fairly sure the first one is better yeah.

I mean it's not like the vast majority of issues people were raising prior to the recent course correction were invalid or anything - the company was behaving badly, it had been declining, and they did need to change their ways. Now some of us might take issue with some of the exact ways they have chosen to change their ways, but the fact is they've made more positive changes than negative ones in the estimation of most fans, evidently, and tbh I'd prefer people accept that than continue insisting wurr aw dooooomed!

You'll never silence the armchair experts!

 JohnnyHell wrote:
You'll never silence the armchair experts!

But MDG's exact point was that the "armchair experts" are, erm, silent.

You kinda get the impression from the pithy wee nicknames and the consternation at the lack of people stubbornly clinging to a negative outlook of GW's financial situation that some of you lot won't be satisfied until anyone who expressed concerns in the past drags themselves danglies-first over hot coals while lamenting their poor judgement in ever criticising Our Mighty Overlords

The "armchair experts" were right. GW's new CEO has done nearly everything they predicted would have to change. Even on price, something I never believed GW would really change on, they put in start collecting boxes and stand alone boxes (like the upcoming necroncs vs mechanicus box) that actually give a deal. They've even reversed some of their retail policies and some stores have switched back from single employee stores to having extra part time people. And they are also trying to get into new sales channels like bringing that Blitz version of Bloodbowl and Space Marine Adventures to show off at the New York Toy Fair. The company went from charging for every little thing including painting instructions to giving away massive amounts of youtube hobby content.

They aren't silent now because they have been proven spectacularly wrong. Any prediction of GW's eventual demise was obviously made assuming GW stayed the course. GW didn't.

 frozenwastes wrote:
The "armchair experts" were right. GW's new CEO has done nearly everything they predicted would have to change. Even on price, something I never believed GW would really change on, they put in start collecting boxes and stand alone boxes (like the upcoming necroncs vs mechanicus box) that actually give a deal. They've even reversed some of their retail policies and some stores have switched back from single employee stores to having extra part time people. And they are also trying to get into new sales channels like bringing that Blitz version of Bloodbowl and Space Marine Adventures to show off at the New York Toy Fair. The company went from charging for every little thing including painting instructions to giving away massive amounts of youtube hobby content.

They aren't silent now because they have been proven spectacularly wrong. Any prediction of GW's eventual demise was obviously made assuming GW stayed the course. GW didn't.

I agree with this 100%. GW has fundamentally changed for the better in almost every way that matters in my opinion. Still far from perfect, rules are still not airtight, models are still expensive, but that doesn't mean they haven't improved on all fronts. It's just a matter of how much. Let's be honest, 4-5 years ago half of us thought GW was on the way out.

I think credit where credit is due genuinely applies here. Good for them.

Totally agreed, Tom! GW have really righted the ship, and it has paid off in a huge way with their valuation.

The main thing I'm unsure of for the future is if their main games (40K and AoS) at large scale are sustainable with how hobby things are trending, and with how spread out the rules are. But even if people drift away from such big project commitments, GW have positioned themselves really well with all the smaller boxed games they're offering now.

As they jokingly called themselves at the AdeptiCon seminar last year, "New Games Workshop" really has listened and done what their customers were asking for - and good on them for doing so

The pricing of models outside of the Start Collecting or boxed games is still an issue. I don't claim to be a typical customer but I can't be the only person who isn't spending as much as they could.

As an example, I have yet to buy Primaris models outside of the Starter Sets or easy build variants. I certainly haven't bought any of the claimshell pack sngle models as I don't see the value even though I love the Apothecary model. I am lacking some of the more powerful list options as a result but I'm very much a casual gamer so I'm still happy.

Then again, GW are potentially about to get 80 issues of the Conquest part works out of me.....

Are Reinholt and Michael Bartels from the now defunct Painting Budda one and the same? Michael had his ‘the future of games day/games workshop’ series which was very similar to reinholt’s posts. I think they both applied for Rountree’s job as well. I might be wrong, I really don’t know if they are the same person. All their analysis was well written and very valid points were made. GW has changed a lot of things they were suggesting.

They've definitely been doing things right lately. With the possibilities of N17(when the finally release all rules/gangs), Titanicus, blood bowl, etc GW should see more success. The easy to build, start collecting boxes, terrain packs, and upcoming forgebane have really broadened the horizons and increased the accessibility to new hobbyists. Let alone bringing people who had played back in the day and hadn't for a long time(myself included). I had previously wanted to come back to 40k in late 3rd, 5th & late 7th but couldn't get excited about together thru crappy rules, pushy sales clerks (@gw stores). Roundtree has righted the ship and I look forward to what comes next.

Reinholt's most cogent criticism of GW has also largely been dealt with (bypassed really). He used to regularly point out a disconnect between their manufacturing model and their retail/pricing model.

Injection moulded plastic has high up front capital investment and negligible marginal costs. GW had to invest a lot of money into the machinery to design and tool the moulds to produce a given kit. But then each sprue produced after that investment only costs pennies in both plastic and other inputs.

GW's retail and pricing model was about selling less product for a higher amount of money. WIth each year under Kirby their volume declined but their margins remained strong. They sold less product to less people for more money. And this also allowed them to have cost savings. You need less production staff, less administration, less shipping, less warehousing, less everything when you are moving a smaller amount of product but at a premium price.

GW has now reversed this disconnect. And they did it with only partially changing their pricing model (as alphaecho pointed out above). They have their start collecting and stand alone sets and multiple starters ranging from a tiny skirmish to a good number of models (Frist Strike - Know No Fear - Dark Imperium) as well as making sure products like the Easy to Build kits are still relatively affordable.

The rumours are that GW is now operating at capacity. Things go out of stock even in their own sales channel. They are apparently operating their machinery at the point that they have hit the limits of their hookup to the electrical grid.

Their marketing has allowed them to get the benefits of a manufacturing method geared for mass production without the conflict with their retail/pricing strategy as they are creating demand through marketing. Reinholt's concerns have both been proven correct and totally bypassed at the same time.

They are even outsourcing marketing to a magazine company like they did during the LOTR boom with "Battle Games in MIddle Earth". The Conquest magazine is starting as UK only project, but if it ends up working, I could see them targeting other select markets with a similar project.

And their biggest form of marketing is summed up with the statement "Every brand is a media company." Whether it's comedy through Regimental Standard, hobby content through Warhammer TV, gaming coverage and talk through Warhammer Live, news through Warhammer Community, the Warhammer brand is now a media company.

The danger at this point is to make the natural conclusion that since demand is up, they can obviously increase prices further. If they are operating at capacity now, what about if they raised prices so their volume dropped just below capacity but they end up with more money at the end of the day? They wouldn't have to risk capital expanding production (whether that is an upgrade to their electrical systems or making another facility). How much less would they really sell if their new releases were 15% higher than a similar product from a year ago rather than the 8-11% it is now?

If the Dark Angel Intercessor kits were 32.50 GBP, what about if the Space Wolf ones that might come out later this year were 37.50 instead of 35?

You can see the attraction of Kirby era thinking. The company should be pricing their products so that units sold multiplied by price equals the highest revenue possible. Kirby went way, way too far. Hopefully Rountree comes to the conclusion that if you're going to go out of your way to create demand through marketing you shouldn't destroy it with your pricing model.

--

Brexit anyone? I mean, how many top 100 companies can there be in England when England cuts ties to the EU? Went from a small company in the ocean to a big company in a small pond? It's all economics. Bleh.

 RiTides wrote:
Totally agreed, Tom! GW have really righted the ship, and it has paid off in a huge way with their valuation.

The main thing I'm unsure of for the future is if their main games (40K and AoS) at large scale are sustainable with how hobby things are trending, and with how spread out the rules are. But even if people drift away from such big project commitments, GW have positioned themselves really well with all the smaller boxed games they're offering now.

As they jokingly called themselves at the AdeptiCon seminar last year, "New Games Workshop" really has listened and done what their customers were asking for - and good on them for doing so

One key thing to remember on your good points, one can never underestimate the sustainability amazing models can give a game system or sales in general. GW has been cranking out stuff that is likewise of consistently high quality and, unlike years past, a lot of it is genuinely NEW in some way. Either new as in the last time models for it were out with rules was before half of us were born like GSC, or new as in entirely new, this occurs a lot more in Sigmar but hey, I think it is a powerful strategy to hit both nostalgia with one swing and brand new with the next.

I have always had the impression that strong performance in either the gameplay or hobby aspect tended to buoy the other more than it would for other companies in GW's case. Sheer size and history give them a lot more viable business options than the competition.

Completely anecdotally derived and subjective but that's the impression I have. Anyways, Tommy likes 'new' GW

 Tamwulf wrote:
Brexit anyone? I mean, how many top 100 companies can there be in England when England cuts ties to the EU? Went from a small company in the ocean to a big company in a small pond? It's all economics. Bleh.

Stock market indexes don't change because of Brexit. The only way to get included in an index is to be listed on the exchange covered and meet the criteria for inclusion.

Great points, Tom! I'm keenly aware that they're still trying to maximize how much I spend on their products overall, of course . But when they're mostly putting out what I've wanted (in my case, the boxed games) it's hard to resist!