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.

Why ain't you becoming shareholders? Seems stock price has been on the rise for years...?

Sods Law.

If I buy now, it’ll be downhill all the way, guaranteed.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There’s also stock differences between Indies and GW.

I tend to buy from Element, but if they don’t have it in stock, I’ll look around, and may eventually order direct from GW.

Do people really need product so urgently they'll buy it at a GW markup though? I understand when it comes to independent games (especially anything supplied by Ass-mode) sometimes you have to bite the bullet and buy more expensive or else potentially never see it for a year, but there's usually no more than just under a week's wait - at worst - for restocks of GW product.

Sure it can happen. Hobby stuff to finish an in progress project, an upcoming gaming session or event you want them for, last minute purchase for a present (i've been there!) etc.

Also for online stuff, different stores/companies have different levels where they give out free shipping. If you just want something specific, and it hits certain cost bands, GW online + free shipping is equivalent to FLGS10% off + a few quid shipping. Or at least so close as to not care.

Most German stores sell at normal retail and I know only 2 German online sellers that offer discounts and they only offer free postage if you order in the tripple digits. So not buying from GW directly does not automatically mean paying less

Ragnar69 wrote:
Most German stores sell at normal retail and I know only 2 German online sellers that offer discounts and they only offer free postage if you order in the tripple digits. So not buying from GW directly does not automatically mean paying less

Precisely; the only stores in mainland Europe I've encountered so far that offer "discounts" on GW produts are those that simply haven't bothered to increase the prices after a certain price increase, and once a big discount due to the store's anniversary. No standard 10-20% off. And with that being the case, I imagine many people won't look online for, say, the webstore of a British independent store that might offer a discount (plus favourable exchange rate) either.

Of course, when time is of the essence a local store with stock will in fact typically be favourable in these places as ordering directly from GW means the parcel has to come all the way from the UK (at least in the European countries I've lived in so far).

As for why else you would order from them, I wonder what proportion of their sales are generated from Made-to-Order, online exclusives or indeed Last Chance to Buy products. Plus sales generated from ordering any of the aforementioned and adding in extra products due to the free shipping threshold etc. Not a massive percentage perhaps, but still a factor.

 smurfORnot wrote:
Why ain't you becoming shareholders? Seems stock price has been on the rise for years...?

Therefore the time to have gambled with share buying would have been years ago just prior to Kirby departing.

Hindsight is wonderful.

The UK FInancial Times had a piece on GW today where an analyst from Jeffries (I'm not into shares and such so I have no idea what their credibility is) suggested turn over may have exceeded £100 million this year if not for Covid-19.

The Editor of Wargames Illustrated has a feature on the pandemic in issue 392. Some firms like Empress, Baccus6mm and Pulp Figures did quite well whereas Gripping Beast and Warlord Games suffered from the lack of retail not covering an increase in Mail Order.

animal310 wrote:
A company whose share price has increased almost twenty fold in four years from £4.51 per share in July 2016 to £87.05 per share now is not on its way out.

And people thought Disney buying Star Wars was the best decision ever too.

I don't think Games Workshop is in trouble, but I do think they are pushing up against the limit of what they can do. Their ability to grow is not infinite and it seems they are starting to ask too much of their players meager means (more so in a post COVID economy), so there's going to be some contraction coming soon. I think a new edition of 40k will stave off this contraction for a while, though.

And speaking of Star Wars, I think the absolute best way to destroy your IP and salt the earth behind you is to enter the culture war, which GW gleefully did recently. Regardless of which side you come down on, that division created is ultimately very destructive to a brand over time. If it can take down Star Wars in two years, it can just as easily take down GW. I just read this article, which is basically the beginnings of a fanbase going to war with itself, and with GW.

Not gonna go into this, but BITC isn't a good source for literally anything that is not "news that's already been reported".

Also, they're on Parler. That alone should tell you something.

alphaecho wrote:

 smurfORnot wrote:
Why ain't you becoming shareholders? Seems stock price has been on the rise for years...?

Therefore the time to have gambled with share buying would have been years ago just prior to Kirby departing.

Hindsight is wonderful.

The UK FInancial Times had a piece on GW today where an analyst from Jeffries (I'm not into shares and such so I have no idea what their credibility is) suggested turn over may have exceeded £100 million this year if not for Covid-19.

The Editor of Wargames Illustrated has a feature on the pandemic in issue 392. Some firms like Empress, Baccus6mm and Pulp Figures did quite well whereas Gripping Beast and Warlord Games suffered from the lack of retail not covering an increase in Mail Order.

You would have thought many hobbies such as this would have done very well out of the lockdown periods, impact on the economy and job losses not withstanding. I'm quite into plastic kit building and after speaking to a few places I shop from they were absolutely inundated with orders earlier into the lockdown period and couldn't keep up, compounded by some of the stock and supply issues.

I guess where wargaming may have struggled is with the halt on gaming, tournaments and clubs etc. Although I'm sure many will have used this time to buy more armies and paint more things!

 Sqorgar wrote:

animal310 wrote:
A company whose share price has increased almost twenty fold in four years from £4.51 per share in July 2016 to £87.05 per share now is not on its way out.

And people thought Disney buying Star Wars was the best decision ever too.

I don't think Games Workshop is in trouble, but I do think they are pushing up against the limit of what they can do. Their ability to grow is not infinite and it seems they are starting to ask too much of their players meager means (more so in a post COVID economy), so there's going to be some contraction coming soon. I think a new edition of 40k will stave off this contraction for a while, though.

And speaking of Star Wars, I think the absolute best way to destroy your IP and salt the earth behind you is to enter the culture war, which GW gleefully did recently. Regardless of which side you come down on, that division created is ultimately very destructive to a brand over time. If it can take down Star Wars in two years, it can just as easily take down GW. I just read this article, which is basically the beginnings of a fanbase going to war with itself, and with GW.

I’d be careful of assuming other people’s means matey.

As for their recent and impressive expansion, GW themselves have warned, since it began, it’s not going to last forever, so that’s hardly new information. Rather than relying on existing customers, they’re focusing on attracting new ones and via various revenue streams, hence their licensing drive.

I suspect Eisenhorn may be the real litmus test. 40k is an odd beast in terms of its background, and may simply prove unsuited to the small screen. But, if it works, and attracts a decent viewership? It’ll be the tip of a potentially massive iceberg of new money. After all, what works on the small screen attracts the interest of the big screen. And from the big screen, comes The Big Cash In and many, many more licensing opportunities.

I'd also not be proclaiming Star Wars "death" just yet either. They may not be posting hot takes on social media, but there's an entirely new generation of kids who grew up watching the new trilogy and really, really liked it

 smurfORnot wrote:
Why ain't you becoming shareholders? Seems stock price has been on the rise for years...?

Because it's probably not going to get much higher, it's overpriced now. For instance GW is worth more than Centrica (British Gas), which is frankly ridiculous. The only way it gets substantially higher is if GW gets Eisenhorn on Netflix/Amazon and it's a massive smash and that results in a '01'-'03 LOTR style boom. Which is a long shot given it's nicheness (far darker than GOT/The Witcher etc, even Altered Carbon which isn't exactly a mainstream smash) and the general public's reaction to miniature games. Even a LOTR style boom would struggle to replicate recent share price growth which came from a very low base.

I am kicking myself at not buying some stock when it was at it's nadir in '16 before Rountree took over. It's not a particularly well understood company amongst general investors so was probably underpriced then, even given the crapness of late Kirby era and most GW fans could tell you there was value there, even a moderately competant successor to Kirby could have increased that value via just listening to the fans. Sticking a grand in then would have resulted in a return of circa £20k (ignoring taxes) as mad as that sounds.

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
There’s also stock differences between Indies and GW.

I tend to buy from Element, but if they don’t have it in stock, I’ll look around, and may eventually order direct from GW.

Do people really need product so urgently they'll buy it at a GW markup though? I understand when it comes to independent games (especially anything supplied by Ass-mode) sometimes you have to bite the bullet and buy more expensive or else potentially never see it for a year, but there's usually no more than just under a week's wait - at worst - for restocks of GW product.

In normal times.

GW's actually been running extremely low on a lot of product at the moment, and both GW stores and independents in my area are suffering from a lack of replacements to kits that have sold out.

Ironically my local GW monday had something like 40 indomitus boxes left while the rest of the store was almost barren


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 smurfORnot wrote:
Why ain't you becoming shareholders? Seems stock price has been on the rise for years...?

I am




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

animal310 wrote:
A company whose share price has increased almost twenty fold in four years from £4.51 per share in July 2016 to £87.05 per share now is not on its way out.

And people thought Disney buying Star Wars was the best decision ever too.

I don't think Games Workshop is in trouble, but I do think they are pushing up against the limit of what they can do. Their ability to grow is not infinite and it seems they are starting to ask too much of their players meager means (more so in a post COVID economy), so there's going to be some contraction coming soon. I think a new edition of 40k will stave off this contraction for a while, though.

And speaking of Star Wars, I think the absolute best way to destroy your IP and salt the earth behind you is to enter the culture war, which GW gleefully did recently. Regardless of which side you come down on, that division created is ultimately very destructive to a brand over time. If it can take down Star Wars in two years, it can just as easily take down GW. I just read this article, which is basically the beginnings of a fanbase going to war with itself, and with GW.

I’d be careful of assuming other people’s means matey.

As for their recent and impressive expansion, GW themselves have warned, since it began, it’s not going to last forever, so that’s hardly new information. Rather than relying on existing customers, they’re focusing on attracting new ones and via various revenue streams, hence their licensing drive.

I suspect Eisenhorn may be the real litmus test. 40k is an odd beast in terms of its background, and may simply prove unsuited to the small screen. But, if it works, and attracts a decent viewership? It’ll be the tip of a potentially massive iceberg of new money. After all, what works on the small screen attracts the interest of the big screen. And from the big screen, comes The Big Cash In and many, many more licensing opportunities.

A successful media franchise for GW does mean the end of independent GW. One of the big fish will swoop in the consume the company to add to its media empire.

Not necessarily. Depends who owns what percentage of shares.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Not necessarily. Depends who owns what percentage of shares.

Kirby owns the most. And if you think for a moment if, like disney goes "Hey, for a (insert arbitrary sum here), will you sell this to us?" He'd say no? I mean that's not exactly how purchases go, but Kirby would have significant say in any sale of GW.

 Sqorgar wrote:

animal310 wrote:
A company whose share price has increased almost twenty fold in four years from £4.51 per share in July 2016 to £87.05 per share now is not on its way out.

And people thought Disney buying Star Wars was the best decision ever too.

I don't think Games Workshop is in trouble, but I do think they are pushing up against the limit of what they can do. Their ability to grow is not infinite and it seems they are starting to ask too much of their players meager means (more so in a post COVID economy), so there's going to be some contraction coming soon. I think a new edition of 40k will stave off this contraction for a while, though.

And speaking of Star Wars, I think the absolute best way to destroy your IP and salt the earth behind you is to enter the culture war, which GW gleefully did recently. Regardless of which side you come down on, that division created is ultimately very destructive to a brand over time. If it can take down Star Wars in two years, it can just as easily take down GW. I just read this article, which is basically the beginnings of a fanbase going to war with itself, and with GW.

I disagree with the culture war stuff directly, but I will say that SW as a franchise clearly had no direction. The “culture war” stuff was a side effect of the corporate checklist system of art creation—an obvious indicator to the whole as Poochie’s sunglasses were to him. The problem with Poochie wasn’t that he tried to pander to Rastafarians, but that all there was to him was pandering. SW has been all pander and no (intential) substance since the buyout.

Similarly, GW has been creatively adrift for a few editions now. Since 5th, it was pretty clear that GW we’re losing the creative staff who actually understood their product. Nearly every big thing they’ve done since then has been dictated from a marketing checklist, and any culture war stuff is a small part of that. It’s a small symptom of a much larger problem. Pointing at that is like saying Poochie’s sunglasses are the one thing that made the character a creative failure.

stratigo wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Not necessarily. Depends who owns what percentage of shares.

Kirby owns the most. And if you think for a moment if, like disney goes "Hey, for a (insert arbitrary sum here), will you sell this to us?" He'd say no? I mean that's not exactly how purchases go, but Kirby would have significant say in any sale of GW.

If we consider that a major company would be interested, below are some candidates:

Disney: Not a chance in hell. Far too dark for their audience. No experience in the gaming market, no interest in the gaming market.
Amazon/Netflix: Nope, quite happy with the licence for TV shows/movies at most.
Other major Hollywood companies: Very unlikely. If they're interested they'll just via a licence via in house or outside production companies.
Apple: Ha.
EA/Ubisoft/other AAA Video Game Company: Unlikely again, quite happy just getting the licences, unless one of them goes mad and tries to build a multi-media empire.

Hasbro: Always the company rumoured during GW's dark period. Would sit nicely alongside Wizards of the Coast. Unlikely due to the current cost of GW and didn't strike when GW was struggling in the mid 10s.
Asmodee: Like Hasbro, from a similar market place. GW likely far too expensive.

There's not a whole load of companies out there that would want GW or be in a position to afford GW if they did. If it was ever taken over, it'd probably be private venture capital if anything. More likely it's just that the shares will continue trading, if Kirby wants to sell his large stake, he'll slowly run it down through open market sales.

Sort of not related, but I don't think Star Wars got "taken down" by entering the culture war - big yawn outside of the internet tbh. It got taken down by a succession of films large numbers of fans either disliked or were indifferent too (which for any franchise really is kind of the same thing, perhaps even worse.)
TLJ -> "I hate it" "I hate that you hate it" "Banter banter banter"
Solo-> "Tumbleweed."
TRoS "I don't care." "Neither do I." "kthnxbye"

But a few more Mandalorians and they'll be back in business.

If GW release a major release which completely flops because it looks crap - or the player base just decides they've got enough plastic thanks, or would rather play something other than GW games - then they are in trouble. It won't be because they've alienated the internet hard left or hard right who are persuaded selling plastic is somehow progressive, regressive, or simultaneously both.

Its also difficult to square "GW are nearing the end" with "gib Indomitus, gib gib, totally unfair you didn't print enough, print more print more, print moooorre."

Really regret I didn't buy some shares when they slumped in March - but it was a bit of a chaotic time. Sad thing about buying opportunities is that they are usually only obvious in hindsight. Its why most people lose money if they actively trade shares.

Let’s also be careful about what “taken down” actually means.

Rise of Skywalker still broke $1,000,000,000 at the box office.

Go on. Look me in the eye and tell me, by any metric, a film with a £275,000,000 estimated budget near quadrupling that investment is a ‘failure’.

macluvin wrote:

animal310 wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Londinium wrote:
Given their explosive growth since Rountree came in, the fact they're still increasing profits if at a slower rate is definitely interesting.

Considering the price increases have caused much of their stock to increase by 50% (or more) in the last year alone, it's possible that they are selling fewer products to fewer customers, but making a larger profit on a per customer basis. If this is true, then they could actually be increasing profits while ultimately losing customers. That would be a terrible long term strategy for the company. Ask the 90s comic book industry.

It's also possible that they are retaining their customers and making more profits off them too, so who knows?

A company whose share price has increased almost twenty fold in four years from £4.51 per share in July 2016 to £87.05 per share now is not on its way out.

To be fair our stock market spiked after a coronavirus stimulus bill granted retroactive tax exemptions by removing caps on last years taxes for certain things. Basically the rich and a bunch of companies got a hidden stimulus check and that caused our stock market to rise erratically. Moral of the story is that the stock prices are solely based on how well investors think companies are going to do and they all knew that our biggest companies were getting fat stimulus checks.

GW is traded on a different exchange that doesn't really react to US domestic fiscal policy and tax incentives.

I mean, GW's financials were a bit of a mess in the 90s. Kirby and the guys he brought in, ironically, are what righted the ship. Cause he was a businessman who knew business, just not the market he was in.

Super ironic that he had a good successful run for a decade or so before it started crashing down around him.

Why ain't you becoming shareholders? Seems stock price has been on the rise for years...?

I'm up 35%! Bought a few thousand dollars worth of shares just before COVID hit on the OTC exchanges in the US. I wish I had bought stock when it was traiding in the single digits, but I don't think anyone could have expected a floundering toy company to go on this type of a bull run.

I don't think Games Workshop is in trouble, but I do think they are pushing up against the limit of what they can do. Their ability to grow is not infinite and it seems they are starting to ask too much of their players meager means (more so in a post COVID economy), so there's going to be some contraction coming soon. I think a new edition of 40k will stave off this contraction for a while, though.

You think too small. 40Ks popularity now is basically where Star Wars was in 1978, after A New Hope, before it was a household name. Most people don't know Warhammer 40k exists, there is not yet a tv series or a movie or a AAA video game. As a franchise and an IP, there is still a *lot* of upside for GW to profit off of, and with more aggressive mining of the WHFB ("Old World"), 30K, and Age of Sigmar brands/IPs there is even bigger growth potential.

And speaking of Star Wars, I think the absolute best way to destroy your IP and salt the earth behind you is to enter the culture war, which GW gleefully did recently. Regardless of which side you come down on, that division created is ultimately very destructive to a brand over time. If it can take down Star Wars in two years, it can just as easily take down GW. I just read this article, which is basically the beginnings of a fanbase going to war with itself, and with GW.

"Take down Star Wars" - what universe do you live in? Star Wars has made Disney billions, its more profitable now than it was when George Lucas owned it. You might not like the direction that Star Wars was taken in (I don't), but you have a severe deficiency in your ability to think critically if you think Star Wars has been anything other than a major cash cow, even with the controversies.

Because it's probably not going to get much higher, it's overpriced now. For instance GW is worth more than Centrica (British Gas), which is frankly ridiculous. The only way it gets substantially higher is if GW gets Eisenhorn on Netflix/Amazon and it's a massive smash and that results in a '01'-'03 LOTR style boom. Which is a long shot given it's nicheness (far darker than GOT/The Witcher etc, even Altered Carbon which isn't exactly a mainstream smash) and the general public's reaction to miniature games. Even a LOTR style boom would struggle to replicate recent share price growth which came from a very low base.

I think this is a bad take. The setting can be toned to the audience - just look at the Warhammer Adventures novels for a "kid friendly" take. I think GoT and The Witcher are a good indicator that there is an appetite for 40k brand grimdark. The huge growth in visibility and awareness of the franchise - which overall still remains relatively obscure - is also a good indicator of the potential total addressable market and available upside for the property.

Kirby owns the most. And if you think for a moment if, like disney goes "Hey, for a (insert arbitrary sum here), will you sell this to us?" He'd say no? I mean that's not exactly how purchases go, but Kirby would have significant say in any sale of GW.

No.

Kirby is the 7th largest shareholder at 3.3%. The largest shareholder is "Aberdeen Standard Life" at 7.7%. The top 7 largest shareholders collectively make up less than 40% of ownership.

Point of order—Star Wars (NOT A New Hope back then) was a smash hit and a household name during its theatrical release. It was never as obscure as Warhammer is now (unless you count the first few weeks of release). Even if there had never been The Empire Strikes Back, Star Wars would be as well known today as Jaws and ET.

Also Transformers make a fair share of money for a kids toy
does not mean the movies are good or something that will last long

the latest SW films had the simply problem of trying to hard while doing a copy&paste of the original ones and not knowing what story they wanted to tell

would have been easier to just make a movie from the existing EU instead of trying to be creative


For GW, lets see what Eisenhorn can do, but I fear that classic 40k won't fit the current expectation of the political view (an Inquisitor of a facist Imperium)

So there might be more interest from outside the usual costumer to the game itself, pushing sales
but as with LotR, those costumers react much more sensitive to price and rule changes and won't stay long if nothing else changes

For shares, just look at what the Pokemon movies and games have done for Nintendo, short time rise of values but nothing in the long run

Kanluwen wrote:Not gonna go into this, but BITC isn't a good source for literally anything that is not "news that's already been reported".

Also, they're on Parler. That alone should tell you something.

The article I linked to contained links to all the relevant, quoted videos, tweets, and postings. There's enough primary sources there to draw your own conclusions, even if you don't agree with their politics (and I don't). The point is that GW is now a political target from an ever fracturing fanbase - and they didn't have to be. They chose that. And it will only escalate.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:I’d be careful of assuming other people’s means matey.

Since I'm talking about a really big number of fans (numbering at least into the hundreds of thousands, if not millions), rather than an individual or small group, I can make assumptions about their means as a collective. The Bell Curve ain't peaking at being able to spend $600 a month, purely on GW new releases.

As for their recent and impressive expansion, GW themselves have warned, since it began, it’s not going to last forever, so that’s hardly new information. Rather than relying on existing customers, they’re focusing on attracting new ones and via various revenue streams, hence their licensing drive.

First, I'm saying the contraction will be greater than even GW expects. I think demand is like a rubber band, and they've been stretching it too far. When it reaches that end point, it will either break or snap back suddenly. This is what happened with comic books in the 90s, where every other issue was a #1 with fourteen different variant covers - when the snap happened, they didn't just go back to doing the same business they did beforehand, it contracted so much it almost destroyed the entire industry. Rather than stretching the rubber band, they need to stop pushing and dial it back now rather than later.

Second, moving to an IP license factory has its own pitfalls. Marvel had a few successful movies, so Disney bought them outright, which changed the comic creation directives to the point where Marvel Comics is essentially worthless, and Disney just keeps it around out of obligation. Games Workshop would ultimately do better to make their core business right and use licensing as a small, supplemental income. Also, if Games Workshop were to go "woke" and destroy their brand in the manner that Disney tarnished Star Wars', those license dollars will shrink faster than the aftermarket value of a Rose Tico action figure.

MaxT wrote:I'd also not be proclaiming Star Wars "death" just yet either. They may not be posting hot takes on social media, but there's an entirely new generation of kids who grew up watching the new trilogy and really, really liked it

Star Wars isn't dead, but Disney will need to make some drastic changes to get it back to being worth what they paid for it. I've heard rumors they are booting Kennedy, putting the Mandolorian team in charge, and bringing Lucas back in some capacity - which would probably do it. I'm really hoping there's teeth to the rumor of them de-canonizing the new trilogy. I doubt it, but I'm no longer involved with Star Wars as a fan, so I don't have to give a crap one way or the other.

stratigo wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Not necessarily. Depends who owns what percentage of shares.

Kirby owns the most.

No he doesn't, not even close. He's the individual with the most shares, but there's institutions that own far more.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Super ironic that he had a good successful run for a decade or so before it started crashing down around him.

Kirby bought in with borrowed money and needed that back fast
hence he made some decisions that nearly cost them everything (like mismanagement with the SG games, were to much foreign boxes were made that did not sell)
the results are still seen today and while the plan to "rescue" worked, the big money came in after he left (and the management with him)

A few things.

1. Something like Eisenhorn shouldn’t have to worry about political correctness for the setting and internal logic of it, but only from external factors like casting and studio shenanigans. Even social justice types can suspend disbelief. The recent Dredd film didn’t turn off the left with depictions of police brutality because it was obviously part of the premise of the setting.

2. I agree with Sqorgar about demand. We already saw it happen once, during the Kirby price hikes. Once enough customers have have discovered alternatives (Warmahordes back then), it will create an escape valve for all the GW customers who feel dissatisfied with GW’s antics. High prices will drive people to look for alternatives...and there are many maturing product lines and games waiting for them. I personally believe that customers aware of Wargames Atlantic or even Mantic GCPS will have a hard time paying outrageous prices for GW Astra Miliatrum. As 3D printing becomes cheaper and cheaper, and Thingiverse grows and grows, customers will have a harder time justifying paying $35 for a character or $75 for a tank.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Let’s also be careful about what “taken down” actually means.

Rise of Skywalker still broke $1,000,000,000 at the box office.

Go on. Look me in the eye and tell me, by any metric, a film with a £275,000,000 estimated budget near quadrupling that investment is a ‘failure’.

Its a failure if you were hoping for more
But your point is right.
Although the economics are a bit different to that. Disney doesn't get all that $$$. Depending on region something like 33-50+% goes to cinemas. There will also be a big marketing spend for a film which doesn't feature in the budget.
But sure, even if their true all in cost was about $400m, and they bagged $600m, no one is going to lament making $200m profit, even if say TLJ made $300m of that, and TFA made something stupid like $600m+.

This is why say Solo - budget $275-300m, box office about $392m will have lost Disney money - although exactly how much remains somewhat guarded and so debated to this day.

Really the point is that it seemed Disney were on for another Marvel, and we'd have a Star Wars film every year. Or maybe more than one. And if each was making Disney $200-300m, why not? But they seem unclear where to go now, because Solo bombed, and the last trilogy doesn't obviously lead anywhere.

But hey, by 2023 people will probably be keen to see X-Wings and Tie Fighters again.

Are there pitfalls with becoming an IP license factory? Of course. But GW has an obligation to its shareholders to maximize the amount of income it can earn from its IP, whether it is through video games, merchandise, or entertainment media. GW also needs to strike while its IP is hot to take advantage of the momentum less it languish and be overtaken by something else. Is there a risk of over saturating the market, yes of course. But there is a real opportunity where the revenue generated from licensing its IP or leveraging its IP outside of tabletop games has the potential to far outstrip the revenue GW collects from its “core” business right now.

Using Marvel as an example, the revenue it derives from comic book publishing is miniscule now compared to the revenue generated through licensing, games, and video entertainment. Its shareholders would be apoplectic if Marvel (more accurately, Disney) announced that they would be scaling back the use of their IP outside of comic publishing to make focus more on their “core” business. In fact I am sure those investors would point out, quite rightly IMHO, that comic book publishing is no longer Marvel's core business. There is nothing to say that 10 or even 5 years from now, GW's tabletop business will still be GW's core business.

As for the risks of “get Woke, go broke”, I think there is a perspective in business that it too shall pass and that creative and innovative marketing and/or new products will allow them to win back any business loss due to any current pandering to a vocal segment of population.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

1. Something like Eisenhorn shouldn’t have to worry about political correctness for the setting and internal logic of it, but only from external factors like casting and studio shenanigans. Even social justice types can suspend disbelief. The recent Dredd film didn’t turn off the left with depictions of police brutality because it was obviously part of the premise of the setting .

while Dread is not that old, it still was a different time

and it would not be the first series or movie removed because the political situation changed
like single episodes from famous series are not shown anymore because things are more sensitive now

If Dread or Starship Troopers would be in Cinema in now, the reaction would be very different

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Let’s also be careful about what “taken down” actually means.

Rise of Skywalker still broke $1,000,000,000 at the box office.

Go on. Look me in the eye and tell me, by any metric, a film with a £275,000,000 estimated budget near quadrupling that investment is a ‘failure’.

I think you've got your pounds and dollars mixed up. It was around $250-$300 million budget. Usually, you have to double that to get the number to beat after marketing and other expenses. So it needed to make $500-$600 million to break even - which it did (worldwide). But it was the lowest opening of all the Star Wars films (adjusting for inflation), and it had significant drop offs week to week (over 50%) which is never a good sign for longevity. It also basically made no money in the largest market in the world - the Chinese market. I don't know what the Blu Ray sales were like, but I'm guessing it was pretty low. The toy sales were also so abysmal after The Last Jedi (which directly contributed to the death of Toys R Us), that for Rise there were fewer toys made and sold - and toy sales are where Star Wars really makes the cash. Sure, it made money, but as a Star Wars film, it underperformed and made a lot less money than it could've and should've.

Star Wars isn't just a movie. It's a toy line. It's halloween costumes. It's backpacks and pencil cases. It's Blu Ray sales and book sales. It's board games and miniature games and video games. Star Wars is an ecosystem, and I think it is pretty telling that Rise of the Skywalker very nearly managed to avoid all of them.

chaos0xomega wrote:You think too small. 40Ks popularity now is basically where Star Wars was in 1978, after A New Hope, before it was a household name. Most people don't know Warhammer 40k exists, there is not yet a tv series or a movie or a AAA video game. As a franchise and an IP, there is still a *lot* of upside for GW to profit off of, and with more aggressive mining of the WHFB ("Old World"), 30K, and Age of Sigmar brands/IPs there is even bigger growth potential.

I don't think so. Star Wars was so popular in 1977 that Kenner sold people the promise of Star Wars toys (since none had been manufactured yet) and it sold gangbusters. By 1978, has a successful toyline and many imitators. It even had a Christmas special. Where's my 40k Christmas Special?

I don't think 40k has much mainstream appeal, personally. Not in the way that something like Star Wars or Doctor Who is. I think the closest analog would be Games of Thrones - a show for adults that is allowed to be "grimdark". But I don't think 40k could achieve the same success because the virtues of 40k is largely in the expansive canon and not necessarily in the individual characters or plots. Having read Eisenhorn fairly recently, it was a fine book, but there's nothing in it that is going to resonate with a large mainstream audience - not in the way that Ned Stark's plight did. It's a relatively straightforward book with few surprises or relatable characters. Due to the terminology used, it's vaguely impenetrable to outsiders. Where it shines, in my opinion, is in the way it presents the larger 40k universe. Seeing a chaos space marine from the perspective of simple human. That's not going to resonate with people who don't already know what a chaos space marine is or what it represents.

"Take down Star Wars" - what universe do you live in? Star Wars has made Disney billions, its more profitable now than it was when George Lucas owned it. You might not like the direction that Star Wars was taken in (I don't), but you have a severe deficiency in your ability to think critically if you think Star Wars has been anything other than a major cash cow, even with the controversies.

I think this is patently incorrect, for all the reasons I stated above about how poorly Rise of the Skywalker did.