PDA

View Full Version : When GW does...



GamesmasterZ
07-12-2005, 18:47
We all know the inevitable, so we must face it.

When GW does raise the price of a normal regiment/squad boxed to $40.00(Don't know how many pounds it would be...), will you still dish out the money to buy the stuff? I mean, if it gets higher than the already high prices, will you continue doing the hobby? Or will you probably take my road and play another game?

Just curious...but we know it's going to happen.

erion
07-12-2005, 18:49
How about instead of coming here and trolling aboout games you freely admit you no longer play, you run along and find someone else to bother?

GamesmasterZ
07-12-2005, 18:52
What are you talking about? I still play Warhammer, 40K, and a host of the SG's systems(Blood Bowl, Inquisitor, Mordheim, and Warmaster.). I'm just asking the simple question of whether other people will. I know money is tight to alot people(Me included) and I was wondering if people would make a switch or stay loyal to the cause.

Luke
07-12-2005, 19:17
the fact is i cant afford to collect it now. in my opinion 20 quid for 5 pieces of plastic is a little warped if you think about it. (termis)

ive only been collecting and playing for nigh on 10 years now and have seen the prices rise well in excess of inflation. 10 quid for 10 metals, great! 18 quid for 10 plastics.....not so great.

please, im well aware of the higher quality of the kits so dont jump down my throat. i'd like to think ive been in the game long enough to form my own opinion.

so as a result im selling off all my GW (except my main chaos whfb army) including my bits boxes. ill keep the books, makes me look like i have a brain in my head when i have a shelf full of books :D

as for wd, i wont be buying another. nothing to do with the current price...well sort of. i dont think its worth 4 quid for a book full of adverts. shame it took me 7 years to realise that :rolleyes:

@ erion: if you dont like it, dont read it.

Some guy (UK)
07-12-2005, 19:21
Id continue to buy the models, but not as much (i dont buy much as it is at the moment); and I'd turn to ebay or an online store that offers a discount in order to save that little bit more.

And of course we all know GW's prices are ridiculous but we still buy the models dont we ;) (well most people that is).

Later, Some Guy (UK)

Griefbringer
07-12-2005, 19:38
Why would the next model price hike stop me from playing a game?

I haven't really bought any GW models for a full price for almost two years. If I need models, there is a thriving second-hand market, plus I already have all my painted forces - plus plenty of unpainted models. I do not really need to buy more models for a while. Plus I can always buy non-GW models if I want to and use them instead.

As for starting to play non-GW games, not really an option for me: I have always played them.

starlight
07-12-2005, 19:48
I haven't bought GW stuff at retail in years.

The only reason that GW will raise prices is because they believe that the average gamer will continue to pay what GW charges. Any time sales slow below a certain level GW either moves the range to MO (SG/DE) or lowers prices for a bit (a few years back Battleforces went from $130CDN down to $110 before going back up to $130).

It's up to the individual gamer to decide what they feel is good value for their money. I feel that GW provides good product, but at the existing prices the *value* just isn't there anymore. Bear in mind that I play Orks so my opinion is coloured by having a poorly made Codex and a model range which has been ignored for over five years. If GW wants my money, they need to pay attention to my armies.:eyebrows:

Lardidar
07-12-2005, 19:54
40k army - check
Fantasy army - check
Mordheim gang - Multiple check
Necromunda Gang - Multiple check
Blood bowl team - Multiple check
Epic - check
Hero quest - check
Inquisitor - Check
Space hulk - check
Lotr - check

Nope, no need to buy any more here ..... Only thing I want from GW is a place to play, and the evil money grabbing empire gives me that for a huge fee of ......... Not a thing

I only buy things when I want to, and if I want a new shiney toy then I realise I have to pay whatever the shiney toy making company says I have to.

And I have no problem whatever with that, it's good business

Luke
07-12-2005, 19:59
ive always wondered:

if GW reduced the prices of its products by 30-40%, would it gain enough popularity to encourage people to buy more?

QUESTION! in 1996, how much did the 40k boxed game cost? was it 20 quid?




btw: woot teh 1400th post!

starlight
07-12-2005, 20:06
Post:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=339321&postcount=44

Thread:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?p=341467#post341467

Where I explain the basic theory behind price increases.:D

Crube
07-12-2005, 20:06
IIRC when 40K was first released as a boxed game, it was £35.

Before that it was availabel as a book only, at about £15...?

The boxed games at the time were £20, Epic, BloodBowl etc.

The Troll games were only a fiver....

As for prices, I'll continue to buy GW stuff, as ong as I like it. However, if the price doubles for arguments sake, I'll buy half as much. IE I'l still probably pend the same anmount as I do now....

Rabid Bunny 666
07-12-2005, 20:08
well, i'm going to get 2,000 points on fantast, 2,000 of 40k, and 500 of LOTR, then a warband/team of specialist games stuffs, then i'll stop buying new stuff

yes, GW has devoured my life...

starlight
07-12-2005, 20:12
2K of Fantasy? 2K of 40K? :wtf:

The heck with systems, I have 3K of given *Armies*.:p

Current armies with 3K+ : Snotlings, Goblins, Orcs, Orks, Salamanders, IG, Harlequins (DEWC).

Current armies with less than 3K (ie working on): Ravenwing, Deathwing (only one I need models for)

Griefbringer
07-12-2005, 20:31
QUESTION! in 1996, how much did the 40k boxed game cost? was it 20 quid?


Looking at the prices in some of the old White Dwarfs:

-WD156 (December 1992): WHFB boxed set (4th edition, just released) £29.99 + Warhammer Battle Magic supplement £17.99

-WD174 (June 1994): WHFB or WH40K boxed set £34.99, Warhammer Battle Magic or Dark Millennium supplement £19.99, codex/army book £9.99

-WD202 (October 1996): WHFB boxed set (5th edition, just released) £50, WH40K boxed set £40, Dark Millennium supplement £20, codex/army book £20

-WD216 (December 1997): WHFB or WH40K boxed set £50, Warhammer Magic or Dark Millennium supplement £25, codex/army book £15

I hope somebody found this informative.

Chuffy
07-12-2005, 20:47
If GW did go under I would just go into historical wargaming fully.

So...meh.

Besides, I have thousands of GW toy soldiers and dozens of books and magazines. I'm well prepared for the 'collapse' (pffft).

Luke
07-12-2005, 20:50
ditto. whab for teh win.

either that or start somthing like warmachine (?)

Chuffy
07-12-2005, 20:53
ditto. WMA for teh win.

either that or start somthing like warmachine (?)

Fix'd.

I am the mistake fixor.;)

Crube
07-12-2005, 20:55
Griefbringer.

Thanks for that. You are of course coorect. I remember the hoo-hah when argos refused to sell them at full RRP. WFB was £25, and 40K £30...

Hlokk
07-12-2005, 20:58
Post:
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showpost.php?p=339321&postcount=44
Where I explain the basic theory behind price increases.:D

You don't fancy doing an essay on marketing for me do you? ;)

I reckon, when GW does jack up the price to £20, it'll probably have reached its limit price wise and will have to look at other strategies or downsizing its UK/global operations (Get rid of stores, fire staff)

Looking at starlights example, I reckon they are quite past the optimum price, and any further increases are only going to compound the problem (My specialisim is business law and HR, not marketing im afraid).

Although I am sure we can look forward to the day when boxed sets cost £25 each and you get 12 models in each. :rolleyes:

starlight
07-12-2005, 21:31
Hlokk: Doing? No. Helping? What do you need?:D

20th Century Boy
08-12-2005, 10:16
I can't afford it, yet I buy it - so if the prices go higher nothing changes, and I'd still buy it.

I would look at the money and time I already invested and think - "That shouldn't have been for nothing" - so I'd still buy it.

I'm an addict, so I'd still buy it.

About sums it up...

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 12:13
I think GW are at a crossroads. The cash cow that is LOTR is now spent, and they simply are not going to generate the sales they expect now that the film trilogy is over. GW benefitted from all the LOTR hype that was generated, but now that has gone.

I feel the products have diminished in quality over the last few years. They are not investing in new races for 40k and Fantasy, but simply rehashing the same old products. Ogre Kingdoms, Tau and Necrons have been successfull, so why not do more?

Also, GW are facing a lot of competition from IK Warmachine, Starship troopers, Confrontation, Flames of War etc etc. The quality of the competition has increased to the same level (dare I say better?), the miniatures are on a par, the rules are more interesting, and better supported. When GW does have an excellent product (Epic Armageddon), they dont have the resources to support it effectively and it dies. The Epic stuff was far too expensive, and the rate of releases was so slow that it wasnt viable to do any armies (except Orcs and Marines).

I feel that Privateer Press listen to their customers a lot more, and produce products gamers want.

I have sold off practically all my Warhammer 40k and Fantasy stuff, I had planned to replace them with one army for each system and leave it at that. I am having loads of difficulties deciding which armies to do. Nothing is new and exciting.

I am thinking very carefully where to invest my money. The expense is so high now, it makes sense to look at other systems. For example a Warhammer Ancient Battles army in 25mm Perry Twins miniatures will cost me about 1/3 of a standard Warhammer Fantasy Battles army. Food for thought.....

Darkseer
08-12-2005, 12:22
Deathwing were my final army when I intended to quit the hobby.

I did by Necrons afterwards, but the Deathwing still kick **** and embody everything I like about 40K.

I played Warmachine and Confrontation and didn't find either of them as gripping as 40K, although they are better priced.

Warmachine was good at 'starter pack' level. But once it went beyond that it all became far too complicated for my tiny brain to handle.

Confrontation models are awesome. It's a shame that the rules suck so bad.

Grand Warlord
08-12-2005, 13:25
Once I get my Empire and Dwarfs and Dark Angels done that will probably be it for me..

Hlokk
08-12-2005, 13:44
Although I will probably never finish playing or collecting GW stuff (Unless it does get up to £25 for a squad, then im definitely out), it does seem odd that no-one bats an eyelid when Mongoose charge £15 for 8 bloody awful MI troopers with no posability at all.

it strikes me that these price increases are, in part, simply to keep LotR going. I dunno to be honest, it seems like interest in LotR is waining, the films and such have gone, yet GW seems to keep pumping money in as if to say "we won't be beaten!!!" What also gets my goat are the sneaky price increases they don't tell you about. Like when scouts went from 3 for £6 to 2 for £5. which means you end up paying £15 for 6 scouts instead of £12. :rolleyes:

The way I see it, GW has suffered recently from over diversification. In the past 4-5 years, we've seen:

Black libary set up
Forge world set up
Black industries set up
Fanatic press set up
A new core game updated yearly
GW buy a majority share in Sabre tooth.


Now, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that its a lot of business aquisitions and developments in a relatively short time. I think GW havnt really thought all this through, and have ended up spending far too much money far too quickly, then end up having to make dramatic cutbacks (Redundancies, pretty much killing fanatic, getting rid of Warhammer Comic and Inferno, store opening hours etc...) and jack up prices to cover for their mistakes.

I think, as it stands, we'll either see GW do the smart thing and sell off or merge some of its businesses (Sabretooth and Black Industries/BL are the obvious ones) and downgrade LotR to a semi-fanatic game, or we'll see them spend a truckload of money on something else to try to get a short term profit.

How would you guys feel about GW acquiring another lisence? like for the Halo movie or some such, and perhaps producing one game a year to tie in with a movie release, then move them to Fanatic?

Chuffy
08-12-2005, 14:14
store opening hours etc...)

Actually that probably saves them more money. Or makes it easier on the staff themselves.

Hlokk
08-12-2005, 14:19
Thats what I was getting at, they've cut down hours and such to compensate for having spent so much money in the first place. Believe me, GW do not care about their staff.

Luke
08-12-2005, 14:21
well i have decided that i really dont want to buy any more GW. i've been looking around other companies instead to see what they can offer. if anyone can recomend anything other than IK warmachine, be my guest

whab is teh win, i have to say but finding opponents with a 15th century wotr army is a little frustrating :D

Hlokk
08-12-2005, 14:26
well i have decided that i really dont want to buy any more GW. i've been looking around other companies instead to see what they can offer. if anyone can recomend anything other than IK warmachine, be my guest

Starship troopers is quite nice, if a little pricey. The arachnid models are gorgeous.

www.mongoosepublishing.com

What about roleplay? the nWoD is absolutely fantastic

www.white-wolf.com

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 14:50
I think a lot of people look at GW from a very narrow time frame, and this both makes them look financially unstable and not very bright business wise. Some of the assertions I read in this thread (and others):

1) That a major price rise is inevitable
2) That GW still expect that they will make the same revenue in the next three years as in first three years
3) That GW are spending on acquisitions they simply can't afford, leading to 1)

Now, I'd contend none of thes eare true. Yes we'll probably see price rises in the future if it becomes apparent the market would take it - as Starlight showed, that it was businesses do. Look at petrol - that climbed exponentially. Then the businesses recognised the market would take no more, and immedialty took 4p of the price, and cut of approximatly 5%, overnight. I don't expect GW to do this, but a price drop is not beyond all bounds of imagination.

The second point, that GW still expect LotR to be a cash cow, is patently not true. Look at the statements from the directors in financial statements - they knew the downturn was coming. Sure, maybe it was a little sharper, and a little quicker than anticipated, but business does that. I think the board know what they're doing from what I've read in their reports.

Third, GW have been investing heavily in infrastructure for the past five years, and recently have been consolidating their position. The goal as best as I can see is to get the company back on it's historical growth track, as opposed to the extraordinary growth in the last five years. Shareholders inherently oppose such a move, because it means they get less money less quickly, but it's probably a good move for the long term stability of the company. Thus, I don't expect prices to rise as a result, because they are simply playing the long term game.

The board look to me like they have spent a few years updating the company for the modern market place, perhaps with a readjustment of where they sit in that marketplace. That doesn't mean price rises are inevitable!

If they do happen though, I'll keep playing - I haven't bought much in a long while, but Christmas is coming, and my family can pay whatever price they like - convenience of full retail in stores, or a bit cheaper, but marginally harder to find online.

-- Imbroglio

Hlokk
08-12-2005, 16:06
The board look to me like they have spent a few years updating the company for the modern market place, perhaps with a readjustment of where they sit in that marketplace. That doesn't mean price rises are inevitable!
So if I understand correctly, what your saying is that, while GW may be making a lessered profit now, it doesnt necessarily mean that it will continue to do so in the long term, because of diversification and attempts to develop their home and other markets?

Hmmm, I never thought about that

boogle
08-12-2005, 16:29
I'll be geting the new Dwarfs for Xmas, i'll buld that up to 3000 points, if by that time, the Regiments and Squad boxes go up to £20, i'll not buy direct from GW anymore, i'll be trading/ebaying,/2nd hand shopping, although for my sins, FW will still recieve my money (ergo GW does still get cash from me, but through one of their other lines)

Jedi152
08-12-2005, 16:32
Confrontation models are awesome.
Hahahahahahahahaa ... oh, you're being serious.:wtf:


Yes i still would buy GW stuff. It'll probably be 20 quid a regiment by this time next year...

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 18:29
I think a lot of people look at GW from a very narrow time frame, and this both makes them look financially unstable and not very bright business wise. Some of the assertions I read in this thread (and others):

1) That a major price rise is inevitable
2) That GW still expect that they will make the same revenue in the next three years as in first three years
3) That GW are spending on acquisitions they simply can't afford, leading to 1)

Now, I'd contend none of thes eare true. Yes we'll probably see price rises in the future if it becomes apparent the market would take it - as Starlight showed, that it was businesses do. Look at petrol - that climbed exponentially. Then the businesses recognised the market would take no more, and immedialty took 4p of the price, and cut of approximatly 5%, overnight. I don't expect GW to do this, but a price drop is not beyond all bounds of imagination.

The second point, that GW still expect LotR to be a cash cow, is patently not true. Look at the statements from the directors in financial statements - they knew the downturn was coming. Sure, maybe it was a little sharper, and a little quicker than anticipated, but business does that. I think the board know what they're doing from what I've read in their reports.

Third, GW have been investing heavily in infrastructure for the past five years, and recently have been consolidating their position. The goal as best as I can see is to get the company back on it's historical growth track, as opposed to the extraordinary growth in the last five years. Shareholders inherently oppose such a move, because it means they get less money less quickly, but it's probably a good move for the long term stability of the company. Thus, I don't expect prices to rise as a result, because they are simply playing the long term game.

The board look to me like they have spent a few years updating the company for the modern market place, perhaps with a readjustment of where they sit in that marketplace. That doesn't mean price rises are inevitable!

If they do happen though, I'll keep playing - I haven't bought much in a long while, but Christmas is coming, and my family can pay whatever price they like - convenience of full retail in stores, or a bit cheaper, but marginally harder to find online.

-- Imbroglio

A price rise is inevitable. GW know that the demand for their product is price inelastic (ie people will buy regardless of price), their last set of accounts was dissappointing - regardless what is said by the management.

I know GW are investing heavily in their infrastructure as a long term goal. Fine, in the long term this will reap rewards, definitely. GW used to use a company to produce all their plastic miniatures. Once they obtained the machinery to produce their own, they cut their costs and could produce what they wanted. However, their plastic miniatures have increased in cost. Why should they? Why hasn't GW benefitted from economies of scale? They have, they are just keeping the extra profit for themselves and the shareholders. They know the customers are going to buy regardless of price. The price inelasticity again. However, there does come a point where people will say no more. At the moment, there are a few good substitutes out there too. A lot of them are ex GW staff who are using their own experiences of GW to further their own companies.

GW are still putting a lot of resources into pushing LOTR as a core game, which personally I think they won't get the return on they are looking for. They did extremely well out of it while they were benefitting from the films, and all the related products which were fuelling all the hype at the time, however the bubble has burst. GW should cut their losses and concentrate on another product. I would love to see the sales on the Mines of Moria game. I am certain they have not met their sales expectations.

Why dont GW invest in more film/game tie ins? Could you imagine the potential profits GW could reap if they had a Star Wars license deal for example? A lot of the creative work would already be done, and its a simple matter of working a system around the film and producing the appropriate figures.

As a shareholder, I am concerned about the loss of key members of staff in the design studio. The Warhammer systems need something new, not just rehashing old codices/army books. Look at the Tau for example. A very good seller for GW.

Look at the cash GW invested in the Warhammer Online system, almost £1 million IIRC. Not a penny return on that. Specialist games suffered because they could not devote enough resources to make it successful, and the stupid prices killed it off. Sabretooth games investment has yet to break even!

As Peters/Waterman quite rightly said, GW should "stick to the knitting".

GW should also listen to their customers. I would make the Eldar a priority. Loads of money to be made there. New codex, harlequins, new minis etc etc

erion
08-12-2005, 18:55
Why dont GW invest in more film/game tie ins? Could you imagine the potential profits GW could reap if they had a Star Wars license deal for example? A lot of the creative work would already be done, and its a simple matter of working a system around the film and producing the appropriate figures.
I can seriously not stop laughing at this.

1.All of the "LOTR license steals precious resources from 40k/wfb" bitching that goes on around here.

2.WotC/Hasbro are not going to be giving up the Star Wars Miniature license any time soon.

First, George Lucas owns a considerable amount of Hasbro Stock.

Second Hasbro (formerly Kenner) has had the Star Wars license for toys and games since 1977.

Third, with the current pre-painted plastic miniature line, they can basically print more money whenever they want by releasing "collector" sets or including new versions of out of print Characters in new expansions.

3. With one or more Star Wars TV series slated to come on the air in 2007(or before), do you seriously think they're going to give up the tie-ins?

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 19:05
I was using Star Wars as an example.

What if GW did get the licence before WoTC?

GW could have done something with Chronicles of Narnia for example.

Comic Tie Ins? There are loads of options out there, just waiting to be exploited. That is the point I was trying to make.

Mongoose are doing just that with the Starship Troopers game.

Griefbringer
08-12-2005, 19:27
Second Hasbro (formerly Kenner) has had the Star Wars license for toys and games since 1977.


However, West End Games had in the 90's a licence to make RPG, miniature game, a couple of board games and a line of miniatures.

erion
08-12-2005, 19:29
Narnia would have just competed with GW's own LotR business.

Heroclix pretty much has comic tie-ins buttoned up nicely, however unfortunate that may actually be.

What GW would really need is a solid sci-fi license with an established fan base looking for a miniatures game. Right now, there's just nothing there that's available.

And even then, my original comment about all the whining that would come about because of another licensed game coming out of the studio would still stand. There is a great risk of alienating the current fanbase if a sci-fi license would be taken on.

Crazy Harborc
08-12-2005, 19:30
Foundry is still 30% discounting, Old Glory is still 40% discounting until Dec 11th. There are mailorder/phone-in discounts in the USA and on line discounts for the rest of the world. The time to shop around is NOW.

The suits at GW may still want to pretend ALL it's customers world-wide are rich. In my area, I know at least 35 gamers who are adults with decent jobs and likely life long gamers. We have ALL cut back on our GW product buying. Stores have stopped dealing (resuppling)directly because of hasslings by GW. They are increasing their non-GW minies selections and cutiing back on GWs.

For the USA, not too long after 9/11 there were many news reports about how the entertainment industry was hurting (STILL IS). That does include hobbies.......such as wargaming.....that does include GW.

PC games, interactive TV and a growing number of non- wargames games are affecting the number of offerings for hobbists money.

Recently my oldest grandson selected Heroscape ( by Hasbro) instead of 6th edition by GW. He likes the idea of prepainted and saving $35/40 bucks on the price!! The indie owner was happy too!!

erion
08-12-2005, 19:32
However, West End Games had in the 90's a licence to make RPG, miniature game, a couple of board games and a line of miniatures.

That's because Hasbro didn't acquire WotC/TSR until the late 1990's. The second thing WotC did after digging its claws into TSR's corpse (1st was D&D 3.0) was to publish its own, in-house version of the Star Wars Roleplaying Game in 2000.

The WEG Star Wars RPG was the only new material for Star Wars for quite a while. It's a shame WotC has blatantly ignored most of it.

Brandir
08-12-2005, 21:14
The cost of GW minis does not stop me buying them. Never has and probably never will.

What stops me buying is:

-the quality of the sculpts (I refuse to buy the SKODA or Haradrim minis - I have bought ALL the other LOTR releases)

-the standard of the rules (I have stopped playing 40K as I no longer find the rules inspiring enough to play).

-Warmachine - I have discovered this game and much prefer it to any GW game (well, except LOTR and Blood Bowl).

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 21:31
I think they did Lord of the Rings because it's basically works on the same basis that Warhammer does - Warhammer stole a lot from Lord of the Rings, unashamedly at times. Other film tie ins - Star Wars or Narnia for example - simply have no such connection with the company.

Yes GW keep profits, and yes they try to maximise said profits. Guess what? It keeps them in business, allows them to do what the hell they like without much in the way of financial restriction, and basically make what they see as better product. I'm enjoying it, and plenty of other people are as well.

My basic point is that while GW suffered financially in the very recent past, they are not off the trend of their whole financial history. If you sat down ten years ago, and looked at GW's growth as it was then, you probably wouldn't be a long way off the line. GW has always been steadily growing, with an almighty spike when LotR was first released. Spikes have two sides!

-- Imbroglio

boogle
08-12-2005, 21:42
it begs the question, if they have done their reseaech properly they should have seen that it wasn't just the end of the LOTR film license that made profits fall, it was the price adjustments that keep coming, i have been involved in a lot of things and hobbies in my time and i have never seen prices rise years on year like they have with GW.

I think if they kept the proces static for the next 18 months they moght actually see profits go up again (even if its just a small amount), of not, then the profits will drop again and they'll not doubt have another purge of studio staff etc

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 21:44
I think they did Lord of the Rings because it's basically works on the same basis that Warhammer does - Warhammer stole a lot from Lord of the Rings, unashamedly at times. Other film tie ins - Star Wars or Narnia for example - simply have no such connection with the company.

Yes GW keep profits, and yes they try to maximise said profits. Guess what? It keeps them in business, allows them to do what the hell they like without much in the way of financial restriction, and basically make what they see as better product. I'm enjoying it, and plenty of other people are as well.

My basic point is that while GW suffered financially in the very recent past, they are not off the trend of their whole financial history. If you sat down ten years ago, and looked at GW's growth as it was then, you probably wouldn't be a long way off the line. GW has always been steadily growing, with an almighty spike when LotR was first released. Spikes have two sides!

-- Imbroglio

GW exist to provide their shareholders a decent return on their investment. That is all. I would disagree that GW are producing a better product, not if recent codicies and certain miniatures are to go by.

GW went through a similar profit downturn a few years back, when they blamed Pokemon for their profit blip. They got rid of a few key members of staff, and realised they needed to get on board all the veteran players they had alienated.

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 21:49
extract from GW annual report (Tom Kirby)

When I returned to the business five years ago, one of the first decisions I had to make was: should we take a licence from the producers of the film the Lord of the Rings? It was touch and go. The arguments for doing so were: acquiring more hobbyists, acquiring more independent trade accounts, stopping someone else doing it, and going with the general feeling throughout the Company that we had to do this. It was the last that was most important in my decision to say yes, closely followed by the third. The first two I was more nervous about. Yes, we would get more but for how long? Would it be permanent and, if so, at what level?

I should have been more optimistic. Not only was the product much more successful than I ever dreamed it would be (thank you Rick Priestley for a great game design), it has given us a valuable third product line to support Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000. The Lord of the Rings product sales have declined faster than we anticipated after the unsustainable levels of the last two years, but we still see them contributing to our sales and expect them to do so far into the future.


- Obviously, GW are keen to continue the success of LotR. Personally, I question whether it could be considered a third core game based on current sales. Scouring of the Shire didn't appear to sell well at all. How much mileage is left in the licence? It will be interesting to see.

Brandir
08-12-2005, 21:55
But imagine what the effect on GW would have been had WotC secured the tabletop miniatures licence?

GW were correct to secure the licence. It has made them oodles of money over the past 4 years.

Why do many posters on this forum seem to blame LOTR for all their gaming ills?

In my opinion the massive sales of LOTR minis have masked a serious decline in the sales of WH40K and Warhammer. Why should I, as a LOTR collector and gamer, be forced to pay higer prices for my minis so I can subsidise the poorly selling Warhammer and WH40K ranges?

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 21:59
it begs the question, if they have done their reseaech properly they should have seen that it wasn't just the end of the LOTR film license that made profits fall, it was the price adjustments that keep coming, i have been involved in a lot of things and hobbies in my time and i have never seen prices rise years on year like they have with GW.

I think if they kept the proces static for the next 18 months they moght actually see profits go up again (even if its just a small amount), of not, then the profits will drop again and they'll not doubt have another purge of studio staff etc

Tom Kirby has acknowledged that they failed to predict the downturn, and are using new statistical modelling tools to produce more accurate future forecasts.

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:02
extract from GW annual report (Tom Kirby)

When I returned to the business five years ago, one of the first decisions I had to make was: should we take a licence from the producers of the film the Lord of the Rings? It was touch and go. The arguments for doing so were: acquiring more hobbyists, acquiring more independent trade accounts, stopping someone else doing it, and going with the general feeling throughout the Company that we had to do this. It was the last that was most important in my decision to say yes, closely followed by the third. The first two I was more nervous about. Yes, we would get more but for how long? Would it be permanent and, if so, at what level?

I should have been more optimistic. Not only was the product much more successful than I ever dreamed it would be (thank you Rick Priestley for a great game design), it has given us a valuable third product line to support Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000. The Lord of the Rings product sales have declined faster than we anticipated after the unsustainable levels of the last two years, but we still see them contributing to our sales and expect them to do so far into the future.


- Obviously, GW are keen to continue the success of LotR. Personally, I question whether it could be considered a third core game based on current sales. Scouring of the Shire didn't appear to sell well at all. How much mileage is left in the licence? It will be interesting to see.
Interesting note here, of the top 10 blister releases for GW 9 of them are LOTR and the top seller?, SKODA, so LOTR is still making them money, i feel its not LOTR that is losing them money, its the continued alienation of the Veterans (we can hardly game in stores now, not that i do anyway, but you get what i mean), SG has died a slow and painful death, and the rising prices (Regiments and Squad boxes up £8 in 7-8 years)

Also in 40K the fact that Space Marines seem to be the be all and end all of the system annoys a lot of people and has the potential to hurt sales a lot more (as people i fell will leave the hobby through their disgust at their favourite armies continually geting put on the back burner)

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:03
GW were correct to secure the licence. It has made them oodles of money over the past 4 years.

Why do many posters on this forum seem to blame LOTR for all their gaming ills?

In my opinion the massive sales of LOTR minis have masked a serious decline in the sales of WH40K and Warhammer. Why should I, as a LOTR collector and gamer, be forced to pay higer prices for my minis so I can subsidise the poorly selling Warhammer and WH40K ranges?

I agree, GW were correct to secure the licence. It has benefitted them in all business areas. Remember Heroquest and Space Crusade? They made a killing out of that deal too. Dawn of War has been a major success too. There have been many major successes out of well chosen partnership deals.

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 22:05
I would disagree that GW are producing a better product, not if recent codicies and certain miniatures are to go by.

I've loved virtually all minatures produced by GW in the last two years or so. The Brettonians and Wood Elves for Warhammer are gorgeous ranges. The upgrades to the Marines have been very cool, with some astonishing individual pieces of work. The Tyranids are another great range that went from being good to being it great. The books that go with them have really good.

Look at the 2005 report, page 8, theres a graph of sales since 1991. GW is not just doing well, it's excelled in the last 15 years.

-- Imbroglio

GamesmasterZ
08-12-2005, 22:07
Veterans can't game in stores now?

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:09
I think GW concentrate too much on the new entrant to the hobby. They do provide a lot of sales potential. For example:

White Dwarf
Paints
Brushes and other painting accessories
Rulebooks/sets
Army books
The army itself

This applies for all three core systems, which adds to a lot of cash

What does the veteran buy?

White Dwarf
The odd tin of paint
New updated codicies or redesigned miniatures
Forgeworld stuff?

The thing is, veterans don't bring in as much cash. They hog the gaming tables, laugh at newbies painting efforts, beat the youngsters learning the hobby, and generally become a nuisance.

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 22:10
As far as I'm concerned that's not true (veterans playing in store) - I regularly play till ten pm on a Tuesday night.

-- Imbroglio

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:13
because a lot of stores (those without gaming rooms in the UK), now open at Midday and shut at 6PM, those that doe stay open 1 night a week only stay open to 8PM and that is their games night where they concentrate on the allowing the younger gamers to play (no harm in that mind), but Veterans have no time to game in stores, insdeed i have started going back to me local store a bit more often and more often than not, the TV monitor (allowing staff to keep an eye on the gamers in the gaming room) has been off as there has been no-one in the gaming room (and that has been throughout kids holidays and on the weekends), i have also seen a downturn in general gamers within the store

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:14
I've loved virtually all minatures produced by GW in the last two years or so. The Brettonians and Wood Elves for Warhammer are gorgeous ranges. The upgrades to the Marines have been very cool, with some astonishing individual pieces of work. The Tyranids are another great range that went from being good to being it great. The books that go with them have really good.

Look at the 2005 report, page 8, theres a graph of sales since 1991. GW is not just doing well, it's excelled in the last 15 years.

-- Imbroglio

I agree that the Wood Elf range is excellent, but some of the miniatures (ie Treekin) are awful. The bretonnian plastics are rather naff in my opinion (ie the KOTR/KE), but the Pegusi aren't too bad.

The Tyranid range was definitely improved, agreed.

I thought the new Black Templars sprues were awful. The new Tau Crisis suit is hideous. They really missed a massive opportunity there. The Forgeworld Crisis Suit variants were a million times better.

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:18
As far as I'm concerned that's not true (veterans playing in store) - I regularly play till ten pm on a Tuesday night.

-- Imbroglio
that must be on a store by store basis then

Chris-Tzeentch, i would disagree with you about the veterans, i know a lot of Veterans, myself included who buy huge amounts of new armies (and not just the odd mini, but whole new armies), they do that because they want to bring more than the same tired army week after week, and because they have a gaming room they aren't allowed to hog the tables downstairs

Veterans woudl make a more significant contribution to the hobby if they weren't so disheartened with the way GW treats them (we were told to ignore them to some degree when i worked for the company)

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 22:21
I agree that the Wood Elf range is excellent, but some of the miniatures (ie Treekin) are awful. The bretonnian plastics are rather naff in my opinion (ie the KOTR/KE), but the Pegusi aren't too bad.

The Tyranid range was definitely improved, agreed.

I thought the new Black Templars sprues were awful. The new Tau Crisis suit is hideous. They really missed a massive opportunity there. The Forgeworld Crisis Suit variants were a million times better.

And therein lies the eternal debate amongst gamers... I've been in the various games for at least a decade now, and I think the models GW producing are, generally, much better than they used to be. Like the new models aesthetically or not, most are better sculpts that are possible because of an investment in better machinery.

GW have hiked prices in recent years, but as far as I can see, it's paid for valuable improvements in the product and the nature of the company. It's bigger, more stable, and more successful than it was before the process was begun.

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:23
As far as I'm concerned that's not true (veterans playing in store) - I regularly play till ten pm on a Tuesday night.

-- Imbroglio

The true veterans attend the Swansea Wargames Society, where you can compete against regular tournament players. The competition is fierce, the terrain is superb, the painting excellent, and the company great. Every Wednesday evening, from 6.30 to 10.30, at St Judes Church Hall in Swansea.

Crazy Harborc
08-12-2005, 22:24
Because GW's suits concentrate on AND count on "newbies" coming in faster than "oldbes" saying to heck with the darn price hikes and rules changes to generate money (NOT to improve whatever system).

There are a fastly growing number of "toys" aimed at teens and young adults. That's CHEAPER TOYS cheaper than GW's.

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:24
but what is their justification for more price rises now the equipment is in place and working fine?

Chris_Tzeentch, going bacck to new gamers, the problem is, they often leave the hobby after collecting 1 army, so their contribution is not sustainable

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:26
so speaks the voice of experience, although the question has to be asked, would the Veterans generate more money if they were catered to a little more (as in maybe dropping the prices back down to £15 and reinstating the SG support)?

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:28
that must be on a store by store basis then

Chris-Tzeentch, i would disagree with you about the veterans, i know a lot of Veterans, myself included who buy huge amounts of new armies (and not just the odd mini, but whole new armies), they do that because they want to bring more than the same tired army week after week, and because they have a gaming room they aren't allowed to hog the tables downstairs

Veterans woudl make a more significant contribution to the hobby if they weren't so disheartened with the way GW treats them (we were told to ignore them to some degree when i worked for the company)

Most veterans I know are real hard core addicts, myself included. I used to work for GW many, many moons ago, during my degree days, and we were told the same. I used to encourage the kids to paint, but we had some real ar@£holes who would come in and laugh at their efforts. It really used to annoy me.

The success of Forgeworld should remind GW of the importance of keeping their veteran players happy.

I have owned practically every army GW have ever produced at some time or another. I recently sold off all my stuff, and I am sticking to Tau in 40k, and Tzeentch Deamon Legion in Fantasy. My money is now going into Flames Of War, and IK Warmachine (and Hordes in 2006).

My colleagues in the local wargames club are doing exactly the same. I think the competition GW face is stronger than ever, and GW need to up the ante a bit.

starlight
08-12-2005, 22:30
boggle: In one word (proven by research conducted as part of my job at GW):

YES!

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 22:30
but what is their justification for more price rises now the equipment is in place and working fine?


I don't recall the date of the last broad rise across basic sets, but i don't think it was all that recent in the UK. As far as I remember regiments sets and squad boxes have been £18 for a fair while.

The infrastructure is in place, the plant in America is running, the store network seems to be stable. On this basis alone I wouldn't support any more price rises, but I can't forsee a new rise, but I could be wrong.

-- Imbroglio

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:37
Its not always price increases, it can be more subtle - such as reduction in the amount of figures in the blisters, yet the prices remain the same.

Didn't the blisters go up this year? March IIRC?

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:39
the Boxed sets went up to £18 less than a year ago i believe (January)

starlight, you said yes, but to which statement?

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 22:44
Its not always price increases, it can be more subtle - such as reduction in the amount of figures in the blisters, yet the prices remain the same.

Didn't the blisters go up this year? March IIRC?

I'm not sure - I think some were upped a little - 5 or so of the 'letter' price brackets did increase at some point. The original premise of the thread was regiment sets, I worked on that.

There are other reasons for price rises though, and GW's historical financial trends suggests they are still treading Starlights magic number successfully.

The upshot of all this is that I'll continue to binge buy at Christmas, and other than that paint and special boxes like new Terminators. If prices rise, I'll buy less, and spend more time painting them nicely/writing essays.

EDIT: @ Boogle, I'm not sure that's correct - I can't guaraentee it, but I'm fairly sure I was buuying regiment sets/squads at £18 well over a year ago. Unfortunatly there's no easy way to be sure :(

-- Imbroglio

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 22:44
This is an extract from the 2002 financial reports, and this underlines why GW will never reduce their prices:

The casual observer finds it hard to see why anyone would want to spend so much time and money
collecting hundreds of miniatures, painting them and then playing wargames with them. Surely we should
make the rules simpler, sell pre-painted models, reduce quality and sell cheaper. This is not our business.
We are interested in our devoted customers and in providing what they want - the best products and
outstanding service.


This is taken from the 2003 financial reports :
Chairman’s preamble from the 2003 annual report

Niche markets
Last year I wrote about how our business works. That piece is reprinted at appendix 1 to this annual report. This ‘niche markets’ section is a précis of it.

In any business there is a model (how the business works) and a story (why it works that way). Games
Workshop is a business that designs, manufactures, distributes and sells everything an enthusiast needs to play tabletop wargames in the fantasy world of Warhammer.

In short the model is that of a niche business and the story is that it appeals to a relatively small number of
people devoted to the Games Workshop Hobby.

Niche businesses have natural strengths . . . :

• They are naturally protected from macro economic factors
• Their customers are dedicated and loyal
• They are relatively price insensitive
. . . and consequences:
• They demand high quality products and services
• They need focus and specialisation for success

As a Group we understand niche markets, providing excellent products and service to devoted gamers. That
is what we are good at, and that will continue to be our obsession


Please note above - relatively price insensitive.

GW believe that we will pay regardless of price (within reason), as long as the miniature is of a high enough quality.

The question is, when does the price become more of an issue than the quality of the miniature?

Imbroglio
08-12-2005, 22:50
It's a fallacy to think GW will refuse to drop their prices on principle if they see sales fall (dramatically, not the marginal amounts we've seen in the last 12-18 months). They may be in a niche market, but the day they floated on the stock market was the day they began functioning like a regular consumer based company.

Prices aren't too high at the moment - I can't always afford new stuff, and when that happens, I don't buy. By the same token, I haven't got the budget of either parents pandering to their children, or the successful twenty something with lots of disposable income.

-- Imbroglio

boogle
08-12-2005, 22:55
the thing is, in my area at least the customers are voying with their feet, even the new potentiona customers as the few local GW stores in my areaa (official ones) have been totally empty even over the christmas period, with the staff having nothing to do as no customers are coming in their shops, so it's looking like even the new customers are baulking at the prices

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 23:01
The point is, a lot of the twentysomethings with lots of disposable income (myself included), are putting their money elsewhere in other products, or going to eBay.

I NEVER buy from the GW store. What is the point? Swansea has the Comix Shoppe, and now Nick new store in high street, both of which sell GW stuff discounted. We have the internet, and we have eBay.

GW staff, as soon as you walk in the store, pester you immediately. That is because they are trained to do it. Its annoying, and gets my back up.

I have been into GW stuff for slightly over 20 years, and some of the wargames society members have been into GW stuff for a lot longer than that. We all agree that GW has never had such stiff competition, from direct competitors, and substitute products (online gaming, card games etc etc).

The GW interim results will make very interesting reading indeed.

starlight
08-12-2005, 23:04
boggle: Post 61


so speaks the voice of experience, although the question has to be asked, would the Veterans generate more money if they were catered to a little more (as in maybe dropping the prices back down to £15 and reinstating the SG support)?

I was promoted to management *specifically because* "I still thought like a customer" (my boss's own words). I researched the reasons why people (long-time GW customers) buy/don't buy and at what prices they buy certain things. I found out what motivates them and what upsets them. In short I generated information supporting why GW should expend effort supporting it's Veteran Gamers.

GW was (quite pointedly) not interested and kept channeling my time and energy back to getting new gamers in the door. Sadly they have created a self perpetuating loop where they are acting on false information that they generated internally which is taking them further away from their customers.

The UK isn't so bad, because they have 30 years of history and brandname recognition. In North America, GW needs a different plan because the current one isn't working.:(

Chris_Tzeentch
08-12-2005, 23:05
Can you elaborate a bit more on your findings?

TitusAndronicus
08-12-2005, 23:13
hey starlight, I have questions. If your findings were so obvious and so clear, how is it that GW couldn't see what you weer presenting and why are you no longer employed at GW? These questions aren't to bait you, rather to establish your credentials in this aruement. I vaguely remember the answers but it would help if you would explain for us. If you got your ass fired, obviously your opinions will be biased, right?

starlight
08-12-2005, 23:22
CT: Not on an open forum where GW people are know to lurk.:p

Seriously, since I did the work *for* GW, it's their work, to use or ignore as they please. While I *can* say that, in general and contrary to their mindset, it would be to GW's advantage (and at a very low expense) for them to cater to Veterans, divulging exactly *how* could create...difficulties.

Let's just say that my research showed that over the years an equal amount of effort devoted to keeping a well treated Veteran is worth more than the same effort devoted to recruiting new gamers.:D Far more.:evilgrin:

Edit for TA: Not feeling baited, these are good questions.

GW has a mindset (like many large companies) which it takes time to change. In most cases change only comes from the top. In GW, it will *only* come from the top - coupled with the removal of a few key people who are more interested in preserving their positions and securing their next bonuses. For example in GWCan, I could take over, replace two people and turn the company into a dynamo.

I specifically went to work for GW after studying Tom Kirby and the way he works/talks. I felt that if the company was a reflection of his style then it must be a great place to work. A small fact which GW was unaware of was that I wasn't going to GW strictly to *work*, but also to investigate a potential *investment* by a group that I work with. After my time at GW, we decided to *not* invest in them. Given this years 60%+ drop in share price, it seems that my suggestions were well founded.

Quite simply, my research findings flew in the face of ideas held dear by senior people who have been with GW for many years and they felt threatened by change. Several times I was cautioned by other long time staff to sit on my findings and not *rock the boat*. I didn't feel that I could do that.

I wasn't *fired* per se, but at the end of my Management Probation I was deemed *not GW material*. I was told that while my *performance* was satisfactory, it wasn't what *GW* was looking for. I later discovered that the two people who spoke most negatively against me were the guy who constantly dumped his workload on my desk and the guy who replaced me. No coincedence there? However, distaste for a small group of people doesn't mean that I dislike the entire company. That would be silly.

Actually, I still get along with the vast majority of GW guys that I know and think that GW makes great toys. I just feel that they have too many people in key positions who don't understand how *business* works, which is my strength.:D

TitusAndronicus
08-12-2005, 23:36
I hate doing this, cause I like you a lot. But you danced my question and it's an honest and pertinenat one. If you were fired from GW, it could be percieved that your opinions are biased and meant more to "show up" the leadership who fired you. As far as I know, they have never confronted you here as a former employee, and it is likely that they wouldn't. It would make them look bad. Therefore I have to question the appropriateness of your making claims in here about their business practices. Since they can't or won't rebut your opinions, could you at least clarify for us that you left the company with no personal reasons to want to smear them here?

Again, I'm trying not to bait you, but I'd like to feel that what you're saying is, as an intel person would describe it "untainted".

If you are in fact, a safe source, I would wonder why with such valueable information in its hands, GW would make such obviously foolish choices in its marketing to kids and not veterans.

I hate being so stubborn and I hate even more that I can't see things that would be obvious to a smarter person. But Why would talking about your work for the company cause hem any problems if they aren't going to use it? Could you talk in more general terms about how they could appeal to us old farts?

And please don't think I am baiting you. I'm sure you'be noticed I'm a blockhead at times, and I've never tried to hide that. I'm just not very good at being subtle, eh?


***edit for Starlights edit :-)

Thatnks man, that helped a lot. I have been aground since RT days and watched GW back itself into a corner with what seems a neurotuc need to crack open new markets. I'e always though tthat they should be focusing on what they have a lot harder. Since Kirby took over all I've seen is a more American business attitude that doesn't pay as much ettention to long term stabilty as it does short term money grabbing...

starlight
08-12-2005, 23:45
Read the Edit? I don't type all that fast....

TitusAndronicus
09-12-2005, 00:04
yep! Now you have to read MY edit and we'll get ourselves back on track!
It seems as if GW is stabilizing after a few years of growth. They're out of the buolding in America phase for the moment and are trying to let thing settle down a bit. Could this mean fewer price increases as well?

starlight
09-12-2005, 00:17
I don't know about the prices, they're decided individually by each country.:(

However one point which should make my feelings clear:

If I took over GWCan, I *wouldn't* fire the guy who let me go:eek:.

I'd invest a bit of time retraining him, but he isn't one of the two I'd get rid of. The two that would go would be because they put themselves ahead of the success of the group, they can't be trusted to support their fellow staffers and I won't stand for that.

TitusAndronicus
09-12-2005, 00:34
Hermmmm. And how big is GW Canada actually?
What is the bloody organization of GW anyways?
Each nation a seprate entity, or each continent? Is GW America answerable to GW UK? Overall there seems to have been a mad dash to grab whatever could be grabbed. I haven't seen any signes that individuals are looting the company per se. But I have seen signs that they in the past tried to do a kinkos.
A few years ago Kinkos owner Pau Orfalla sold out. Those who replaced him promptly ran he business into the dirt in order to go publc with it, so that they could buy shitpots of shares cheaply. When said shares went up, they sold out to FEd Ex, who bought a shell of a company, and a name.

I'm waiting for GW to do taht.

starlight
09-12-2005, 00:48
1) Last I counted over 180 - including the HQ and all 26 stores.
2) GW PLC is the umbrella which *owns/is GW*. Studio/Manufacturing/Corporate/FW/SG(Fanatic) are all bits under the umbrella. Each country is a separate sales channel, with some channels serving multiple countries (like US/Can used to be).
3) GWUS is answerable to GW PLC and is on par with GWUK/GWCan/GWAus/etc. However GWUK has a sort of *first among equals* status because of the number of people who transit back and forth between the groups in the UK.

Sadly each country runs it's own show as long as it continues to meet targets, much like any large company.

Whether or not GW will do as described is unknown. They've missed a great opportunity to do so when LotR was peaking, now it will take a while to rebuild the share price to make it a viable deal for the sellers. For purchasers, the share price is looking great.:D

When you buy shares, you're buying shares in GW PLC.

boogle
09-12-2005, 01:05
i could be wrong, but if you fail you management probation, you don't get sacked as such. you can just stay on as a staffer can you not?, if so did you just leave?

starlight
09-12-2005, 01:15
By that point it was obvious that it wasn't going to work, so I took the rather generous separation and left.:D

They didn't know it, but I had the *real* information that I came for, so parting was no great loss to me. We didn't invest and saved ourselves a huge pile of money, which we would have lost if we had invested at that time.

TitusAndronicus
09-12-2005, 03:19
and investing now would be


a) a smart buy
b) a dubious investment


I think this is what we're asking dude. Go ask for yer job back and come back in 6 weeks. We should have some xmas money saved up to invest by tehn LoL

Mikhaila
09-12-2005, 04:33
Why dont GW invest in more film/game tie ins? Could you imagine the potential profits GW could reap if they had a Star Wars license deal for example?

Lots easier said and done, and possibly not profitable either. WOTC currently has the rights to Star Wars. Buying the rights from them would be very expensive, and it's already a very costly liscense. The additional costs incurred from paying royalties could make it just a big loss. Star Wars is also not a guaranteed home run. There have been several SW roleplaying games, a miniatures game, card game, and now clicky game. The liscense has been pretty diluted, and I'm not all that sure that it could be turned into a profitable game at this point, especially a large scale battle game. LOTR was launched at the height of its popularity, and SW is past its peak.

Someone joked about a Narnia liscensed game, and I'd seriously rather see minis for that, than for a Star Wars game, at this point in time.

TitusAndronicus
09-12-2005, 06:21
yah. I'm afraid star wars has never been a good table top game background for some reason. We're more used to seeing them as action figures. Maybe thats what it is.

Chris_Tzeentch
09-12-2005, 08:15
Lots easier said and done, and possibly not profitable either. WOTC currently has the rights to Star Wars. Buying the rights from them would be very expensive, and it's already a very costly liscense. The additional costs incurred from paying royalties could make it just a big loss. Star Wars is also not a guaranteed home run. There have been several SW roleplaying games, a miniatures game, card game, and now clicky game. The liscense has been pretty diluted, and I'm not all that sure that it could be turned into a profitable game at this point, especially a large scale battle game. LOTR was launched at the height of its popularity, and SW is past its peak.

Someone joked about a Narnia liscensed game, and I'd seriously rather see minis for that, than for a Star Wars game, at this point in time.

I wasn't joking about the Narnia licence, I think if they released one box game based around the film, a supplement when the DVD is due for release, a load of miniatures to support it and various odds and sods, they could make a fortune out of it. Why not advertise on TV? Ensure that the GW advert followed the film trailers on TV. Why not advertise the product on the actual movie itself (film trailer)? They could even repeat the deal they did with Agostino with the magazine/film tie in, which was a massive success for LotR.

boogle
09-12-2005, 08:53
TV advertising goes against GW's ethos unfortunately

starlight
09-12-2005, 09:01
Sadly they feel it is too *mainstream* and going down that road will hurt their *niche* status.

My opinion of their motives is slightly...different.:D

Imbroglio
09-12-2005, 09:56
I think it's nice that they don't want to become a cmainstream toy with all the annoying adverts and what not that goes with it at this time of year. Sure we may loath some of the baggage that comes with modern GW managament, but there's still something of the old soul about the company. Narnia or Star Wars, while maybe a little cool, aren't very GW, and I'd be astonished and disappointed if they even made noises about acquring such licenses.

I don't necassarily feel valued as a returning customer, but neither do I feel undervalued. I can go into my local GW, play some games, paint some minatures, and they don't expect me to be buying stuff in most (or even any...) of my visits. I'm never badgered in any store I've been into more than once, GW staff very rarely put the hard sell on me. By providing a place for me to have a night off from a degree, the store provides everything I currently need from GW - even if there is a major, broad price rise coming, which I don't see as inevitable.

-- Imbroglio

Mikhaila
09-12-2005, 12:26
TV advertising goes against GW's ethos unfortunately

For TV advertising to work, you have to hit your target demographic, get a response, and have someplace for that response to happen. GW doesn't have enough market penetration for TV to work, unless it was in the UK. If done in the US, they could dump a few million into advertising, and it would just result in a lot of clueless people looking for toy soldiers at ToysRus. Even if they realized they had to go to a different shop, that shop is probably to far away. There just aren't enough places carrying GW products.

Brandir
09-12-2005, 12:49
I understand that the success of LOTR has made GW re-evaluate its attitude to licences look and see if there are any other licences out there that might be exploited.

One licence that may be available in the next few years is based on Michael Moorcock's Elric seris of books as they may get the LOTR treatment and be made into films.

Chris_Tzeentch
09-12-2005, 13:58
I understand that the success of LOTR has made GW re-evaluate its attitude to licences look and see if there are any other licences out there that might be exploited.

One licence that may be available in the next few years is based on Michael Moorcock's Elric seris of books as they may get the LOTR treatment and be made into films.

IIRC Citadel did actually release a game based on the Elric stuff, and release a miniatures line.

http://homepage.mac.com/antallan/stormrpg.html

Brandir
09-12-2005, 14:00
GW/Citadel did many many moons ago, roughly the same time they released their original LOTR line (1980's).

Mr Tiddles
09-12-2005, 15:34
Stormbringer was a Chaosium product (the folks who made Runequest) and was produced under licence in the UK by GW.
You can see the accompanying Citadel models here:
http://www.solegends.com/citec/index.htm

Inquisitor Samos
09-12-2005, 15:51
"Stormbringer" is a Chaosium product, still: Chaosium Catalog link to "Stormbringer" RPG rule book (http://catalog.chaosium.com/product_info.php?cPath=39&products_id=62)

Lockjaw
09-12-2005, 19:34
ebay, I haven't bought a GW product anywhere else in a few years now, 1: I can usually find what I need cheap, and 2: most of my indipendant shops around here are either closed down or don't sell warhammer anymore. (too pricey, noone buys them, the owner of the place has even been telling people to go to ebay)

Crazy Harborc
09-12-2005, 21:00
I would like to see Howard's version of Conan and the Hyborean Age minies. Ral Partha or Minifigs started to put out a line............Never got done, all the way.