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.

How do!

Bone pickers at the ready folks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My points of interest?

Confirmation GW now has a fully operational battle sta…sorry. Paint Factory, for production and bottling.

115,000+ W+ subscribers, for an income of £3m, against a production cost of £2.4m. Not exactly a retirement fund, but interesting to note it is profitable.

I imagine the W+ subscription base is intended to feed into the main revenue stream. I think there's a term for it and I haven't worded that too clearly. Some of the W+ subs might be new to the hobby, drawn in by W+ (the animation I suppose) and buy models, is what I assume they hope / planned.

Loss Leader perhaps? I can see that, as whatever it’s budget is is, essentially, an Advertising Budget. I just think it’s interesting that based on those figures, it’s actually bringing in cash in its own right.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Loss Leader perhaps? I can see that, as whatever it’s budget is is, essentially, an Advertising Budget. I just think it’s interesting that based on those figures, it’s actually bringing in cash in its own right.

That's certainly a very (very) modest investment in something like this, so I guess it's no surprise it is what it is.

That ROI is significantly better than Netflix FWIW.

Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

Perhaps they're reinvesting that income into making a better app & rules system to launch with 10E? Seems like the next logical step now that the platform is established.

Is it wrong that I miss the unhinged ramblings?

Or well. Sensible corporate speak is fine I guess.

I had heard that Warhammer+ was a requirement to test the waters for potentially securing film/TV licensing deals (companies bidding for IP would want to see if there was a market for it and this was unprovable before Warhammer+). Because nobody had any idea how successful it might be they set a random number of subscribers to break even and picked 40,000, because, well, 40K. This set the production budget at around 2 million, which seems to fit these figures so over 100K subscribers isn't bad at all tbh and if the Amazon deal pays off Warhammer+ has paid off.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

The overall climate in the US is not really good - consumers still face fears of ongoing inflation and report delaying discretionary spending and large purchases due to concerns about rising costs of everyday necessary expenses, but that trend is slowly abating/getting better.

https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/economy/consumer-pulse/state-of-the-us-consumer.html

I.e. it's probably not something GW-specific but an overall trend that hits providers of luxury and hobby goods in general.

StraightSilver wrote:
I had heard that Warhammer+ was a requirement to test the waters for potentially securing film/TV licensing deals (companies bidding for IP would want to see if there was a market for it and this was unprovable before Warhammer+). Because nobody had any idea how successful it might be they set a random number of subscribers to break even and picked 40,000, because, well, 40K. This set the production budget at around 2 million, which seems to fit these figures so over 100K subscribers isn't bad at all tbh and if the Amazon deal pays off Warhammer+ has paid off.

I had a similar speculation myself. As much a way for GW to set the expected/acceptable tone of any potential 3rd Party Production, as for GW to actually decide what they consider acceptable use in that medium.

Is only speculation though.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

From speaking to a few game store owners and what i've seen locally (and keep in mind this is anecdotal), it's likely a combination of factors. It seems that in general a lot of stores have been regularly shorted products due to lack of inventory, meaning less new orders as customers delay more spending as they wait for their products. Another factor is the steadily growing price increases in the US. It's not at AU/NZ prices yet, but a tac squad box is now 55USD (45.42pnd as per google's conversion rates) without shipping included (and keep in mind that same box is 12pnds cheaper in the UK), so prices in general are getting high and in my unprofessional opinion may soon be reaching the tipping point they reached last year in AU/NZ. To clarify, by tipping point I mean they've reached the limit of what the average consumer is willing to pay for the product, but not so high they've lost more people than is sustainable. Keep in mind the potential threat of economic troubles over here also has people hanging onto their cash rather than spend it on hobby products. For me at least it's gotten to the point where some infantry kits are getting to the same prices as some non-upgrade FW kits.

All in all it's likely a mix of multiple factors that wouldn't inherently be dooming on their own, but combined cause things to stall out.

One of the news channels featured this yesterday.

The share price dropped as profit was less than expected even though the core revenue was over £200 million for the first time.

StraightSilver wrote:
I had heard that Warhammer+ was a requirement to test the waters for potentially securing film/TV licensing deals (companies bidding for IP would want to see if there was a market for it and this was unprovable before Warhammer+).

Dunno about this one. Plenty of IPs without a billion pound business behind them get picked up for their TV and film rights.

Now, if the idea was to crank the licencing pricing up by showing initial success...

I actually can't believe Warhammer+ is that cheap for them to run... I'm not suggesting the animation etc is top tier premium, and most of the episode are also not that long, but in the scope of costs for animation, that is cheap as chips for what they have released.

Maybe they got exceptional rates on the productions due to it being a bit of an investment for the animators as well, they did it at cost, for the prospect of future projects... So so so cheap anyway.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

StraightSilver wrote:
I had heard that Warhammer+ was a requirement to test the waters for potentially securing film/TV licensing deals (companies bidding for IP would want to see if there was a market for it and this was unprovable before Warhammer+).

Dunno about this one. Plenty of IPs without a billion pound business behind them get picked up for their TV and film rights.

Now, if the idea was to crank the licencing pricing up by showing initial success...

Potentially both. I mean, they’re not mutually exclusive.

Anyone get the impression there's been a noticeable uptick in interest from the general public lately? I found Warhammer twitter during covid (many negatives as expected but the positives surprised me). I moved beyond the GW section and was again surprised to encounter frequent references there to, memes and such. I might have a false impression.

Regarding the established customer base, as far as spending goes my own situation aligns with the flagging enthusiasm / limits reached / etc etc (though more hobbying lately).

It does seem to be making its way more into the open, sure.

For us Brits, anyone living in a sizeable town would have at least a passing familiarity, even if it just recognising the name Games Workshop or Warhammer, because of GW’s long standing High Street presence (well, typically just off High Street).

Add in that Nerds Am Teh Kewl thanks to other, ancillary media, and I guess the time is just right?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

Maybe then plan to sort their logistics?

 His Master's Voice wrote:

StraightSilver wrote:
I had heard that Warhammer+ was a requirement to test the waters for potentially securing film/TV licensing deals (companies bidding for IP would want to see if there was a market for it and this was unprovable before Warhammer+).

Dunno about this one. Plenty of IPs without a billion pound business behind them get picked up for their TV and film rights.

Now, if the idea was to crank the licencing pricing up by showing initial success...

The difference is GW are very protective over their IP. When you get a GW licence to work with their IP you don't get full creative freedom, GW are breathing down your neck the whole time. Now if you WANT to make something like the Creative Arts team clearly wanted to make Warhammer Total War, this is fine. If you just want the licence so you can make "generic America VS aliens sci-fi film" because you're Hollywood and only read the title and blurb and even then forgot half the blurb - its not a good deal.


GW's IP is fairly "saturday morning cartoon" but it is has some elements some studios might not want to work with. It is more serious here and there; it does have blood and guts; it has mature themes; its not going to have female space marines with perfect gender and sexuality representation. etc..... Basically its a restrictive lore with a niche market focus. So when GW goes shopping its really helpful if they've got some shows that they've funded which

1) Prove that there is an interested market even within the super niche that is Warhammer+

2) Show the kind of material that they are looking to work with to create for their IP; since they will retain control over their IP_for the duration of production.


GW can say "Here's Hammer and Bolter, this is what we'll sell our licence to you to make". And studios can make their minds up on if that's a good deal for them or not.
GW has put their money where their mouth is so on that front it shows that they are also serious about this move toward film and video media.

 Overread wrote:

The difference is GW are very protective over their IP. When you get a GW licence to work with their IP you don't get full creative freedom, GW are breathing down your neck the whole time.

Considering how Ultramarines turned out, being more hands on is probably going to be a good thing.

Unless you're a big TV/media executive team with all your metrics data on target audiences, diversity and other elements that you want to squeeze into the setting; plus a handful of actors and actresses that you want to fit roles in key positions no matter what the actual characters of the original story/setting are.

Just look at what BBC America did to Discworld to get a handle on the kind of changes that can happen when the studio is just left to it themselves; or heck look at Witcher. Time and time again we see this pattern of them spending money to buy an IP, but the only thing they really wanted were the fans not the actual IP or lore

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

I'd bet money it's a drop in 40k popularity. 40k is BIG here, AoS is a distant second and LotR is unheard of.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Overread wrote:

The difference is GW are very protective over their IP. When you get a GW licence to work with their IP you don't get full creative freedom, GW are breathing down your neck the whole time.

Considering how Ultramarines turned out, being more hands on is probably going to be a good thing.

The GW of 10 years ago was far different to the GW of today. It was still stuck in the Kirby era, barely exploiting it's IP, doing few to no marketing deals, nickel and diming an increasingly diminishing fanbase, posting little to no community engagement aside from legally taking down rumours. 40k was also far less prominent in mainstream culture, even in Britain, and no traditional broadcaster would touch it with a bargepole, unlike streaming services and their mad dash to acquire and develop any IP with an established fanbase. So I wouldn't really use Ultramarines as an example.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

StraightSilver wrote:
I had heard that Warhammer+ was a requirement to test the waters for potentially securing film/TV licensing deals (companies bidding for IP would want to see if there was a market for it and this was unprovable before Warhammer+).

Dunno about this one. Plenty of IPs without a billion pound business behind them get picked up for their TV and film rights.

Now, if the idea was to crank the licencing pricing up by showing initial success...

Those IPs get picked up by basically "selling the farm" - i.e. creative control, merchandizing rights, etc. etc. etc. Thats how film/tv/streaming studios actually make most of the money off of these IPs, not so much through the content itself. For most IP deals, films ticket sales don't generate enough revenue to justify the investment into production on their own, whereas TV programming makes money through ad sales - which again often does not justify the investment into production on its own, especially into IPs that require big set/costume/graphics budgets, etc. When it comes to streaming services, the income is derived from subscribers, but that income has to cover the cost of the entire content slate + the streaming rights to older films/tv shows offered by the service - in most cases, the subscription income doesn't come close to covering the production costs of the content slate unless some of that programming drives a notable increase in subscriber counts (which most content and programming does not). Thus, merchandizing and licensing is where these films and programs make all their money.

GW has been reluctant to do that with 40k, because surrendering those rights basically destroys GWs actual core business - if Amazon or Netflix or whomever is licensing out toys, model kits, tie-in novels, games, novelty items, etc. then they are directly competing with many of the products that GW produces in-house or licenses directly to their partners. Its a no-win situation for both parties, basically - either the production studio makes no money or GW makes no money - the only way to avoid that is if GW transitions fully into an IP development and licensing operation (i.e. they kill the game as we know it and license the rights to produce 40k miniatures and tabletop games to the likes of Asmodee while they focus on content/IP generation, ala Disney/Lucasfilm/Marvel) OR if they can prove that there is sufficeint market demand and customer base/audience for the programming that would justify the investment from the production studio with the expectation that they can/will see an ROI directly from subscriber growth or a more limited licensing deal (i.e. GW cuts a deal with Amazon or whoever to let them license apparel and other merchandise that doesn't compete directly with GW, and limited tie-in content like novels, books, games relating only very directly and narrowly to the characters and events associated with the produced content). Its also possible that GW may have agreed to a sort of "reverse licensing deal", where GW produces/licenses the tie-in content itself and shares royalties on those items with the production studio, rather than being the recipient of the royalties from the goods licensed by the production studio itself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Interesting US sales are reported as flat. They do say they expect that to pick up in the next half, but not why.

I'd bet money it's a drop in 40k popularity. 40k is BIG here, AoS is a distant second and LotR is unheard of.

Dissatisfaction with 40k is no doubt a part of it, but through the pandemic I also noticed an uptick in people(mostly "whales") who were importing their 40k fix from overseas - i.e. leverage the weakness of the pound against the dollar (until recently) to purchase 40k from a UK-based discount retailer shipped to a UK based freight forwarder (bonus if you could ship it to a crown dependency like the channel islands where VAT doesn't apply) and then forward it to the US. The increased strength of the pound following Liz Truss departure from office addressed the latter, while the former will presumably be fixed with the release of 10e.

 Overread wrote:
a niche market focus

Probably niche but perhaps high potential for broad appeal. People enjoy sci-fi, cape stuff in particular, though that might be on the way out. Warhammer could do well post-marvel. I used to think I liked sci-fi but realised I just like warhammer a lot, certain series of star-trek and a few other random bits. Not a true sci-fi fan at all, imo it's mostly bad. I'm not much into tv/movie either which might matter. For those that are, that's potentially all that's missing from warhammer. (I think the books are mostly bad too but this could probably be said for art and media in every genre from every era).

It’s also “wholly owned”.

Consider how Marvel parcelled itself off in the past, prior to the MCU saving it’s Bacon. All part of the Marvelverse, but different rights for different characters, and indeed their villains.

With GW? In theory, your License could be 40k, or Heresy, or AoS or The Old World. And everything attached to that particular setting or era. So no risk of you doing heavy lifting with Space Marines, only for Sony to get the Eldar Rights, cast Jared Leto and desperately pretend they’re part of your films too they are honest.

GW would also need to be sure it was selling a licence that was going to be used,

most tv & film licencing is a relatively small payment (although it may appear decent if your an author), with 'more' to come if a movie or show actually happens which it usually does not

and from what ive seen from authors contracts tend to be for 5 or 10 years (understandable as it takes time to develop, fund and make something), but if it goes wrong thats a huge amount of time you can be shut out of exploiting your own brand

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s also “wholly owned”.

Consider how Marvel parcelled itself off in the past, prior to the MCU saving it’s Bacon. All part of the Marvelverse, but different rights for different characters, and indeed their villains.

With GW? In theory, your License could be 40k, or Heresy, or AoS or The Old World. And everything attached to that particular setting or era. So no risk of you doing heavy lifting with Space Marines, only for Sony to get the Eldar Rights, cast Jared Leto and desperately pretend they’re part of your films too they are honest.

From what we've seen in the Video Game market, GW doesn't often do exclusive.
I don't think any of the licences they've done were for exclusive titles. If you sign to do a 40K game there's nothing stopping GW from signing another maker to do another 40K game.

Of course a good many of the licences are also with small firms who like as not need the GW licence more than GW needs them. For TV I suspect that there would be more exclusivity and timed contracts and such.

One big difference is GW aren't new to this and they know what they want from the deal and I think they will be serious at getting it. One thing that many authors get stuck in is that its often their first deal and they don't know the media market one bit nor the legal side. So they can more easily be bullied/convinced into contracts that don't benefit them the best. Or just make ignorant choices - eg the author behind the Witcher series signed a fairly poor contract for Witcher for the games (I forget if it was for the whole licence that made all 3 or for one at a time). CD Project even tried to convince him to take a better deal, but he didn't think it would do that well and then boom suddenly it did a roaring success and he left money on the table.

Thing is authors are one person ships and when things go sour they tend to get burned and stay away thereafter. GW are a business so if one relationship fails they can just walk away and move on without the emotional baggage and issues and such.

GW often does very specific licenses. The people who made the Black Reach game didn't have the rights to 40k. They had the rights to Black Reach. GW may give licenses out like they're having a fire sale, but the licenses themselves tend to be quite narrow in scope, or, at the very lease, specific enough to cover whatever's being made (Total War Warhammer being an example of a larger scope license, but even that has limits).

That's what was so surprising about the Amazon announcement, as it seemed far broader than other licensing agreements.

GW is one company that maintains super-strict rules over their IP. You don't get to invent your own stuff unless they've ok'd it first. This is another aspect to the Amazon thing that's surprising.

Microsoft got laughed out of studio after studio when it was original shopping Halo around, because they wanted to maintain tight control over the production, and that's just not how Hollywood works. They eventually did get their Halo show made, and from everything I've heard/read, it's yet another adaptation where the name was more important to the creators than the actual IP/characters, as they just made gak up and did whatever they wanted with it.

Perhaps that's the 'Henry Cavill' of it all? GW are ok with ceding a bit of control to mega-massive Amazon as long as the man in charge is a die-hard fan who won't do what, say, the Witcher has done and gak all over the IP, or use the IP to grind whatever political/ideological/narrative axe they might have.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Microsoft got laughed out of studio after studio when it was original shopping Halo around, because they wanted to maintain tight control over the production, and that's just not how Hollywood works. They eventually did get their Halo show made, and from everything I've heard/read, it's yet another adaptation where the name was more important to the creators than the actual IP/characters, as they just made gak up and did whatever they wanted with it.

It would not surprise me if many of the big studios, whilst competing against each other, also work together on some fronts. This would be just such a potential example where it benefits them all to offer such contracts to IPs who approach them. If they all offer the same kind of contract most of the time, then it means that they are all competing, but they are also all protecting their own direct profits whenever one of them does land a contract.


It's likely why its so rare and so hard for a creative to land a contract where they retain creative control over the project. Not just where they are consulted, but where they have actual ability to directly influence the final production. Of course this comes with risks, you get someone who has no clue about cinema or such suddenly calling the shots and they can make some utterly stupid mistakes.

GW has one trump card along with their Warhammer+ display and that's 35-40 years of operation and growth over that time. They've proven that their IP, even if its within a niche, has strength and they've not just sat back establishing a consumer population and stuck with it as they got older. They've been very active in bringing in new young people and new generations. Creating a brand that has appeal across the generations. Yes its still a niche, but its a powerful niche that shows a great broad appeal and that has to be attractive to studios looking to licence that IP.

Personally lore and asthetics wise I've really liked the Warhammer + offerings. Yes they need more animation frames per second; yes I wish Hammer and Bolter were twice, thrice as long. Yes there are issues, but I think on the creative front they are very on target. There's a few elements where lore is played with loosely - eg Tyranids are shown making screams and cries whereas in the lore they are generally described as being totally silent and the only scream is from super-heated plasma just as they spit it in your face. But Tyranids making alien sounds is like laser guns making pew pew sounds in space.