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.

 catbarf wrote:
They're set to amortize up-front costs of mold-making and long-term operational costs of running the business, plus a healthy dose of 'how much more can we charge and have people still buy', ie profit.

Its kind of weird to be told I'm wrong because the very point I'm making is a fact. I said the Drop Pod was cheaper because those calculations were made 10 or so years ago when the numbers were smaller compared to today and the Warlocks kit.

Price hikes are everywhere the days. The Ukraine war is to blame, experts say. Logistics chains break and sooner or later this will also affect the tabletop industry.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Price hikes are everywhere the days. The Ukraine war is to blame, experts say. Logistics chains break and sooner or later this will also affect the tabletop industry.

Yes, the cost of raw plastic extracted from suboceanic chinese plastic mines, has risen because of how the silk road has to go around the war. Realisticly the way I see prices at my store, they go up every year. And I am happy I have not bought any new models in almost 3 years.

Sighs. I haven't bought much lately. Had an email this morning... looked... thought... nice... but not that price nice... still tempted by warcry, mind....

I've picked up a couple Last Chance to Buy models before they're rotated out and brought back at an even higher price like the Armour Through the Ages but the last army purchase I made was at the start of the year when I picked up a bunch of Catachan stuff after finding a couple of their old Battleforces (the 25 Catachan, 1 HWT and 2 Catachan Sentinel ones) on ebay.

I'll probably buy more in the future, but my purchases have slowed waaaay down though my community being on a One Page Rules kick probably has more to do with that especially paired with how many hours I work for so few days off.

EDIT: Also I'm confused on why people are saying GW's profit margin is 40%. Are people looking at the profit before taxation and saying that's how much GW is making? Because that's not entirely correct. You want cash from operations, because that's how much money they actually keep after taxes and can use.


And I'm not going to say that 30% left after taxes ain't high. Because it still is, and seems to be structured to allow them to pay dividends and still have money left over (they paid out £37,950,000 in dividends at the time of this report) which left the company £20,880,000 in actual cash to invest in new product lines, expand the company without accruing debt (like that expansion for increased plastic casting they added to the company property) and pay bonuses. Is that too much? I honestly don't know. I do know that part of this seems to be the post LotR-debt that hit GW in the mid-00s and seems to be designed around avoiding accruing debt at all costs but it feels like the dividends are being given too much priority in how they structure their profit margin and should come after they work out what they need for future projects and not the other way around.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
EDIT: Also I'm confused on why people are saying GW's profit margin is 40%.

Because there are people who worked for GW or work in similar companies/parts of the industry who can tell to profit margins on plastic kits for GW are ~40-60%

this is different from their total after profits, which has nothing to do with product margins
you can have 99% margin, but if the management takes too much you might end of with an overall loss

 kodos wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
EDIT: Also I'm confused on why people are saying GW's profit margin is 40%.

Because there are people who worked for GW or work in similar companies/parts of the industry who can tell to profit margins on plastic kits for GW are ~40-60%

this is different from their total after profits, which has nothing to do with product margins
you can have 99% margin, but if the management takes too much you might end of with an overall loss

Ah, okay that makes some more sense. I thought people were misreading the financial sheets again.

Like I said, a lot of the problem is the company seems to structure it's price point around paying out dividends. Now if GW was a worker co-op that did so as a form of profit sharing to the employees I'd be more okay with it, but they're doing it to keep their stock in a "healthy" state for investment banks.

I don't think many companies or organisations are willing to change their modus operandi, specially when they are seeing a big green + at the end of the year on what they make. And I say this as a person who got priced out of w40k.
AoS on the other hand seems to be both cheaper and more fun, if you happen to pick a fun army to play with.

Karol wrote:
I don't think many companies or organisations are willing to change their modus operandi, specially when they are seeing a big green + at the end of the year on what they make. And I say this as a person who got priced out of w40k.
AoS on the other hand seems to be both cheaper and more fun, if you happen to pick a fun army to play with.

AoS seems to have taken steps to try and keep it more affordable thanks to the Enhancement system limiting people from going too nuts on unit sizes

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Karol wrote:
I don't think many companies or organisations are willing to change their modus operandi, specially when they are seeing a big green + at the end of the year on what they make. And I say this as a person who got priced out of w40k.
AoS on the other hand seems to be both cheaper and more fun, if you happen to pick a fun army to play with.

AoS seems to have taken steps to try and keep it more affordable thanks to the Enhancement system limiting people from going too nuts on unit sizes

Which are the unit size limits that 40k's had since 3rd. Sigmar's still got very similar cost per model to 40k, and the army sizes aren't that far off.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
. . . my community being on a One Page Rules kick . . .

OPR is one of the best developments in 40k in the past few years. There needs to be direct competition in the 40k space.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Which are the unit size limits that 40k's had since 3rd. Sigmar's still got very similar cost per model to 40k, and the army sizes aren't that far off.

I am not AoS expert, by my Lumineth Lords army doesn't have any big monsters and consists of 50 infantry and 10 cavalery, plys heroes. And it plays great and is fun. to Play a working GK army I would have to buy 4 NDKs, 50 power armoured GKs. And am not even sure the list is even that good now, considering it struggles vs all the stuff which is top tier right now.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
. . . my community being on a One Page Rules kick . . .

OPR is one of the best developments in 40k in the past few years. There needs to be direct competition in the 40k space.

I guess? I don't know, maybe my view is tainted because some of the guys talk about it like they're trying to make their ex jealous of how happy they are. Well that and it feels pretty barebones. That said, if people like it, that's fine.

Said it often, OPR is what 8th Edi wanted to be

so all those who liked 8th will be happy with OPR
while those who want more ore liked older Edition of 40k more, may have the some problems with OPR as they had with 8th/9th

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
. . . my community being on a One Page Rules kick . . .

OPR is one of the best developments in 40k in the past few years. There needs to be direct competition in the 40k space.

I guess? I don't know, maybe my view is tainted because some of the guys talk about it like they're trying to make their ex jealous of how happy they are. Well that and it feels pretty barebones. That said, if people like it, that's fine.

It's less about whether I like it or not (I haven't even played it), and much more about alternatives to buying overpriced and underdelivering GW rules. I hope OPR, Prohammer, and older editions grow in popularity. OPR in particular seems to be growing in its adoption.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Price hikes are everywhere the days. The Ukraine war is to blame, experts say. Logistics chains break and sooner or later this will also affect the tabletop industry.

Most other companies I purchase from didn't raise prices more than the rate of inflation every year for the last 20 years. Most other companies I purchase from give you far better value for your dollar to begin with. That's why I'm having a hard time swallowing the new prices while happily paying an extra 50 cents for my Starbucks mocha that was the same price in every country I visited for the last 10 years and has only had 1 price raise in the last 12 years.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You want cash from operations, because that's how much money they actually keep after taxes and can use.

That is insanely profitable. Revenue of 191.5M, profit after taxes of 76.4M? And they need to raise prices because their margins are too thin?! No, they're taking an opportunity to price gouge because they think they can get away with it due to global inflation and a war.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Price hikes are everywhere the days. The Ukraine war is to blame, experts say. Logistics chains break and sooner or later this will also affect the tabletop industry.

Experts say a lot of things.

Toofast wrote:
That is insanely profitable. Revenue of 191.5M, profit after taxes of 76.4M? And they need to raise prices because their margins are too thin?! No, they're taking an opportunity to price gouge because they think they can get away with it due to global inflation and a war.

20M after dividends. And the price increase was scheduled long before the war in Ukraine, let's not confuse those things as being related.

And I never defended the prices, just said it looks like they aren't trying to maintain profits specifically, but rather dividends.

H.B.M.C. wrote:bUt ThEy HaVe A rEsPoNsIbIlItY tO sHaReHoLdErS!!!

They do and it comes at the cost of their games. GW is obligated to prioritize more money.
I sucks, but it's working for them. I you don't like it don't support them.

Kcalehc wrote:Buying GW stuff is a completely voluntary thing, its not like anyone needs it to survive. If you can't afford it, find alternatives or stop. Take up chess, similar but way cheaper!

There are other cheap options too. Gaslands, for example, is loads of fun and all you need to buy is a rulebook an a few die cast cars (Hot Wheels seems to be the most popular).
You probably want to buy weapons, other bits (one converts the cars), terrain and a nice set of templates, tokens and dice; but it's set up so that you don't need to and is still cheaper than the books you need for 40K.

Karol wrote:I don't think many companies or organisations are willing to change their modus operandi, specially when they are seeing a big green + at the end of the year on what they make. And I say this as a person who got priced out of w40k.
AoS on the other hand seems to be both cheaper and more fun, if you happen to pick a fun army to play with.

I don't see a reason to change from GW's perspective either, but plenty of reason for players to support a different company.
Not sure AoS will be cheaper, but I preferred it while I still played the Warhammers (with daemons).

Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
. . . my community being on a One Page Rules kick . . .

OPR is one of the best developments in 40k in the past few years. There needs to be direct competition in the 40k space.

Strange to hear that. I have heard a few Kings of War players being doubtful of Mantic's entry into that space with the buzz around the upcoming Firefight 2nd Edition.

Luckily for me GW made the decision about paying for their stuff for me.

They killed off Warmaster, Epic, Battlefleet Gothic, Warhammer Fantasy Battles, and 40k has turned into something that just leaves me cold.

The prices are a bit out of hand when one looks at the rest of the tabletop miniature world. However if they made Epic or Warmaster again I know that I'd buckle like an obese kid at an all you can eat pizza place.

 DarkBlack wrote:

Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
. . . my community being on a One Page Rules kick . . .

OPR is one of the best developments in 40k in the past few years. There needs to be direct competition in the 40k space.

Strange to hear that. I have heard a few Kings of War players being doubtful of Mantic's entry into that space with the buzz around the upcoming Firefight 2nd Edition.

FF is a tricky story anyway, Mantics original SciFi entry with Warpath is much older and was a port of the KoW rules with plastic SciFi upgrades for the fantasy Dwarfs and Orcs models

long story:
short: Deadzone as a skirmish game was much more successful than Warpath, and now Mantic tries to fill the gap with an upscaled Deadzone game (Alpha Test Title was Deadzone XL) to catch the Deadzone players rather than try to please 40k refugees with a downscaled Warpath

so that KoW players are sceptical is not a surprise, as the game is something very different from KoW, (same as Deadzone players are not big fans of KoW Vanguard) with a different target group
but they also target a different community than One Page Rules, as those are aimed at being a better version of current 40k were you can play your existing armies as 1:1 copy (with all advantages and disadvantages)

 wuestenfux wrote:
Price hikes are everywhere the days. The Ukraine war is to blame, experts say. Logistics chains break and sooner or later this will also affect the tabletop industry.

Or it's just (day/month/year/quarter) & time for your regularly scheduled long pre-planned GW price hike.

Although GW's prices are rated at a quite high of a premium I have been surprisingly disappointed that a lot of other games are actually quite expensive as well, with the greatest difference that those games usually just require much fewer models which makes it cheaper in the long run perhaps. I mean, I have full teams/armies in Legion and MCP and the models aren't exactly cheap(except maybe for hero models in Legion comparatively), but the overall cost for an entire force/hero team was lower.

I would, however, love for more people to jump onto the Star Wars Legion wagon. I want that game to succeed and not some god forsaken World War 1/2/3 wargame that this industry is often riddled with. That's what I find most tiring about the entire hobby and the reason I haven't gone much outside of GW games except with MCP and Legion.

 kodos wrote:
. . .
but they also target a different community than One Page Rules, as those are aimed at being a better version of current 40k were you can play your existing armies as 1:1 copy (with all advantages and disadvantages)

^This is the big thing for me, and probably many others. We like the 40k IP, we have armies, but the rules/balance/book churn has gotten way out of hand, and having a popular, semi-universal alternative method for PUGs would be great.

It is also for, yet my problem is that I was not a big fan of the latest versions of 40k in the first place
so OPR is sidegrade rather than an upgrade for me (and I fear that as soon as GW brings a new Edition and promise that this time they will really try, all the hype about OPR will be gone)

were I feel more home with rules like the upcoming FireFight from Mantic (were I also already have armies, as GW does not make SciFi Dwarfs so I have the Mantic since they came out)

 kodos wrote:

so OPR is sidegrade rather than an upgrade for me (and I fear that as soon as GW brings a new Edition and promise that this time they will really try, all the hype about OPR will be gone)

I strongly doubt GW will do a 180° turn and simplify 40K to what OPR have produced. As it is GW seem to be hell bent on making their games convoluted ad a way to add depth.

The OPR systems are, I feel very safe from losing appeal. Not just due to their rules, but also the great 3D miniatures they have as well.

GW does not need to make a U turn to get the 40k people back, they just need to make the promise that this time it will be good

And it is not like GW has not done a 180, like from 7th to 8th or WHFB to AoS, when they feel the need for it.

And it is not like the current situation is very different from 7th, and while was easy to get people playing OPR during end of 7th, it was nearly impossible after 8th was released

Yes OPR will be around after 10th is released, if the hype for it will stay depends if GW can get goodwill of the community or not

 kodos wrote:
GW does not need to make a U turn to get the 40k people back, they just need to make the promise that this time it will be good...

Which they've done over five edition changes since I've been playing, and it's never been true. It's always come up with new and exciting problems to stack on top of the old problems.

 kodos wrote:
GW does not need to make a U turn to get the 40k people back, they just need to make the promise that this time it will be good

And it is not like GW has not done a 180, like from 7th to 8th or WHFB to AoS, when they feel the need for it.

And it is not like the current situation is very different from 7th, and while was easy to get people playing OPR during end of 7th, it was nearly impossible after 8th was released

Yes OPR will be around after 10th is released, if the hype for it will stay depends if GW can get goodwill of the community or not

GW have indeed done U-turns. 40k 2nd edition to 3rd edition, WFB 5th edition to 6th edition, WFB to AoS. Epic To Epic 40,000, etc. The big changes usual come after a while with a certain system. In 40k 3rd to 7th weren't that different, they still had the same gameplay, it was more things on the edges that had changed.

8th and 9th still share a lot of the same gameplay, again just things on the edges that are different, so I feel confident in saying that 10th won't be a big change to what we are seeing now with current 40k. I'd love to be wrong, as I would like 40k to be a good system, that's doesn't groan under its own weight. Aside is now, I think k GW are focusing on the tournament crowd, as that crowd is more interested in chasing a meta, so will buy the current hot thing that helps them dominate the tournament scene. GW like all companies are in it to make money, the tournaments crowd are for GW a golden goose.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
. . . my community being on a One Page Rules kick . . .

OPR is one of the best developments in 40k in the past few years. There needs to be direct competition in the 40k space.

100% agreed, havnt had that much fun with 40k in a long time



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Which are the unit size limits that 40k's had since 3rd. Sigmar's still got very similar cost per model to 40k, and the army sizes aren't that far off.

I am not AoS expert, by my Lumineth Lords army doesn't have any big monsters and consists of 50 infantry and 10 cavalery, plys heroes. And it plays great and is fun. to Play a working GK army I would have to buy 4 NDKs, 50 power armoured GKs. And am not even sure the list is even that good now, considering it struggles vs all the stuff which is top tier right now.

what point are you trying to make? That not every pile of model works as a list?