GW and Price Rises: An Economic Hypothesis

[Torga_DW]

Before 8th edition came down the road WFB was a dead game system. Many of the shops here had pretty much stopped carrying it and I'd not seen a game going on in probably two years or so. That's changed completely since the release of 8th. That many of the crotchety old rules lawyers that beat the previous edition to death abandoned the game and fled to GW competetors was a positive in my eyes as they were most of the reason I quit playing and sold my stuff in the first place. GW took a bold and brave step and completely reinvented it's core game systems and from what I see, it's paid off. Yes, some people got mad and left, others came in, and still others like me, came back.

Thats a personal anecdote, which is essentially meaningless in the bigger picture. For my local scene, 7th was alive and thriving until 8th, where it nose-dived out of existence.

So at the moment, from my point of view, GW's offereings, both rules and models, are vastly improved over just 10 years ago. I like the current direction and many, many others do also. Faced with that competition you keep mentioning GW blazed a new trail. And that's exactly the point, GW isn't PP or Mantic. Nor should they be. They offer something those game companies don't. Now there is a choice. 40K and WFB doesn't have to be everything to everyone. Like it or not, both systems have very dedicated followings even though they aren't represented in these forums. I see a lot of people playing WFB and 40k, Warmahordes not so much and I've yet to see anybody playing Mantics offerings. Which is not to bash those games as they obiviously have their dedicated followings too.

Models are getting better, barring finecast. Fluff and writing has changed targets to children, being written at their level. The rules have largely been the same since for a very long time, and followed the same patterns. I don't see GW blazing any trails, but i suppose our definitions may be radically different.

It's not that GW doesn't listen, it's GW is not wanting to be a PP clone. As I said earlier, what GW is doing in the here and now is working for GW. I don't see them as stale or backwards, I see them as willing to take risks and make their own path. PP found a willing following in GW's cast offs and that to everyone's advantage, but that doesn't mean that GW failed in loosing that portion of their audience. You cannot and will no ever please everyone.

What gw is doing might be working, but only if their target is to shrink into a niche. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but definitely the opposite of growth. The numbers tell the story, their prices go up every year but their income remains largely the same, meaning less customers. Interpretation of what this means varies greatly.

I applaud GW's boldness in reinventing itself. And there are a lot of "me's" out there even if we don't post here.

I have no doubt of this, and i believe GW are very aware of you.

[chamelion 6]

Thats a personal anecdote, which is essentially meaningless in the bigger picture. For my local scene, 7th was alive and thriving until 8th, where it nose-dived out of existence.

Uhhh... yeah, that's a personal anecdote. I thought that was obvious. This is a conversation on the internet about a game with little plastic space elves and dragons and stuff... Not a high school debate on thermodynamics.

Models are getting better, barring finecast. Fluff and writing has changed targets to children, being written at their level. The rules have largely been the same since for a very long time, and followed the same patterns. I don't see GW blazing any trails, but i suppose our definitions may be radically different.

Personally had no problems with Finecast that I couldn't fix in half the time I spent trying to get some of their older metal stuff to an even marginally acceptable level... As for the fluff and writing, I don't know what great literary gems you recall, but the writing has always hovered around a 4th or 5th grade level. It's almost all been derivative and a pastiche of somebody else’s stuff… Personally I thought the gothic “universe crumbling to ruins” had pretty much become stale and the change to heroic fantasy was at least refreshing. To each their own.

As for the rules… If they didn’t change much, why’d all your friends abandon the game when 8th showed up? Something must’ve changed… I can say that in my experience (another anecdote) the whole atmosphere surrounding the game has changed with 8th… I see far fewer people standing around debating rules than I used to and much more playing. It’s much more relaxed.

What gw is doing might be working, but only if their target is to shrink into a niche. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but definitely the opposite of growth. The numbers tell the story, their prices go up every year but their income remains largely the same, meaning less customers. Interpretation of what this means varies greatly.

Or more customers buying much less, or the same number buying a bit less, or fewer buy the same, or far fewer buying more… I’ve seen no real demographics. Not that it matters. I really don’t sit around contemplating GW’s business strategies. I simply buy what I like, ignore what I don’t. It’s kind of a primitive attitude, but it works for me.

I have no doubt of this, and i believe GW are very aware of you.

Then they are reaching a target audience that isn’t strictly children or frustrated parents trying to appease their spoiled brats! Sort of tanks the premise that GW targets only rich kids…

[logan054]

Personally had no problems with Finecast that I couldn't fix in half the time I spent trying to get some of their older metal stuff to an even marginally acceptable level... As for the fluff and writing, I don't know what great literary gems you recall, but the writing has always hovered around a 4th or 5th grade level. It's almost all been derivative and a pastiche of somebody else’s stuff… Personally I thought the gothic “universe crumbling to ruins” had pretty much become stale and the change to heroic fantasy was at least refreshing. To each their own.

I've found finecast very hit or miss, its not so bad with the blisters so you can check the model first ( I have seen some rather awful miscasts in those), its the boxes, my Shaggoth was terrible, arg, Are you just making that up about the metal now? I really don't think I have had all that many issues with the metal, I think the only issue I had was with my chosens (on one guy) weapon not being long enough, I certainly can't remember ever getting any badly moulded stuff back when I was playing 4th and 5th ed fantasy. I've certainly seen far worse finecast miscasts than I ever have with metal.

As for the rules… If they didn’t change much, why’d all your friends abandon the game when 8th showed up? Something must’ve changed… I can say that in my experience (another anecdote) the whole atmosphere surrounding the game has changed with 8th… I see far fewer people standing around debating rules than I used to and much more playing. It’s much more relaxed.

The core mechanics of the game have hardly changed that much, I think the only part of the game that has had massive changes over the years is magic, movement has hardly changed, charging is just random now and the importance of charging is reduced. Interesting enough it wouldn't actually take a large amount of work to make a 4/5th ed army book work with 8th, it would actually take even less to make a 7/8th ed book work with 5th, thats how much the game has changed! If the game had changed leaps a bound using armybook from such different editions would be next to impossible.

I don't think the rules debates has really reduced either

Or more customers buying much less, or the same number buying a bit less, or fewer buy the same, or far fewer buying more… I’ve seen no real demographics. Not that it matters. I really don’t sit around contemplating GW’s business strategies. I simply buy what I like, ignore what I don’t. It’s kind of a primitive attitude, but it works for me.

More customers buying much less? are we talking about more customers spending like £20 a year or something? be serious! I think its more likely less people are spending less, maybe even more people are just buying the rules and going to cheaper companies for the models? I can certainly see a lot of people will be buying Dwarfs from AoW once all the new kits are done.

[Torga_DW]

Uhhh... yeah, that's a personal anecdote. I thought that was obvious. This is a conversation on the internet about a game with little plastic space elves and dragons and stuff... Not a high school debate on thermodynamics.

Yes, and you were introducing your personal anecdote into the conversation as a universal fact. I could add here how much I prefer red meat to chicken, but it doesn’t prove anything or have any bearing on the topic at hand. Which is why I pointed it out, as you seemed to be using it as a ‘proof’ that your beliefs were correct.

Personally had no problems with Finecast that I couldn't fix in half the time I spent trying to get some of their older metal stuff to an even marginally acceptable level... As for the fluff and writing, I don't know what great literary gems you recall, but the writing has always hovered around a 4th or 5th grade level. It's almost all been derivative and a pastiche of somebody else’s stuff… Personally I thought the gothic “universe crumbling to ruins” had pretty much become stale and the change to heroic fantasy was at least refreshing. To each their own.

Personally I’ve been really fortunate with finecast, but I follow the thread here and have seen some horrific examples of what can be put out. As you state, the game has changed to heroic fantasy, whereas I found it closer to lovecraftian horror in space when I started. Theres no wrong or right here, but personally I’m finding the setting to be more and more like an episode of dragonballz. Not my cup of tea.

As for the rules… If they didn’t change much, why’d all your friends abandon the game when 8th showed up? Something must’ve changed… I can say that in my experience (another anecdote) the whole atmosphere surrounding the game has changed with 8th… I see far fewer people standing around debating rules than I used to and much more playing. It’s much more relaxed.

Largely because they like to powergame, and the particular changes of 8th made that harder. I myself find that the debates are more dependant on the people, although the rules do give them a large number of openings. Having said that, the fundamentals of both game engines have been largely the same since they first came out. Some streamlining, some random changes for the sake of changes, otherwise much the same. A player of one edition will have little trouble understanding the broad principles of another edition.

Or more customers buying much less, or the same number buying a bit less, or fewer buy the same, or far fewer buying more… I’ve seen no real demographics. Not that it matters. I really don’t sit around contemplating GW’s business strategies. I simply buy what I like, ignore what I don’t. It’s kind of a primitive attitude, but it works for me.

No, the particular details aren’t really subject to opinion. GW charges higher prices each year. Their income is largely the same each year. These are facts straight from their annual reports. If their customer base is the same, and they're charging more money, they should be getting larger incomes. They are not. Why this is happening, what they intend and what the eventual results will be, these are subject to speculation. If you have no interest in contemplating GW’s business strategies, why are you posting in this thread? Contemplating GW’s business strategies is the topic of this thread. If these things are of no interest to you, why are you here? Not intended as an insult, genuinely curious.

Then they are reaching a target audience that isn’t strictly children or frustrated parents trying to appease their spoiled brats! Sort of tanks the premise that GW targets only rich kids…

Theres a large difference between the target audience and the received audience. The target audience of women’s clothing is women, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be men buying them (for themselves or for others). Computer games and movies that are targeted at men doesn’t mean there won’t be female players / viewers. The question is how do the numbers break down, and where is it most effective to devote your marketing resources? GW seems to think it is best done at the 10-14 demographic. Maybe it is, we don’t have that data, hence topics such as this speculating what they’re trying to achieve.

edit: minor clarifications

[lanrak]

Hi chamelion6.
I did specificaly say the corperate managment had been guilty of doing nothing much at all.

After the LoTR bubble burst.
Mr Kirby himself said they had grown 'fat and lazy' on the back of easy sucess.

So what new dynamic action has he taken since?
Proper market research to improve customer product synergy?
Restructuring the buisness plan to suit todays modern market place?
Full and in depth research into buisness operations , establishing benchmarks and best practices?

Or did he just sack a load of low paid workers, make the ones left work harder and give himself a pay rise?

I have nothing but admiration and respect for the talented studio staff past and present.
THESE are the ones responcible for everything GOOD about GWplc.

You say the games of 40k and WHFB have improved over the last 10 to 15 years.
They have , but in such an infantesimaly small way compared to rules developed away from GW plc corperate influence.

Most of the competation (in the UK), is populated by Ex GW studio staff.
And oddly enough all these little companies are growing thier market share, like GW used to do before Kirby instructed everyone GW plc '...is in the buisness of selling toy soldiers to children...'

So perhaps it was the gargantuan efforts of the talented studio staff that blazed the trail for GW.(And stop GW plc being completley abandoned by its customers.)

When the game devs were left in charge of game development , (1987 to 1997.) GW DOUBLED its turn over every 3 years!
Since Kirby started using game development for direct marketing , (selling oy soldiers to children.)
GW plc has lost over 40% of its sales volumes.

Can you please explain what re-invention GW plc corperate managment has implemented in the last decade?
Slightly altering the rule sets to sell customers the same stuff at higher prices seems fairly constant..

Just imagine how popular GW plc would be with the same talented studio staff, but lead by a dynamic corperate managment focused on improving customer satisfaction and retension.

Oh wait we can,look at the rise of the competition!

[chamelion 6]

Universal truth? Proof? No, just a comment that somewhere between 6th and 7th the game died here and 8th brought a revival. Take it for what it's worth. I'm having a conversation, not trying to debate. But then that's what I didn't like about 7th. Everybody seemed to want to debate everything all the time and had some point to prove. That's not my cup of tea.

As for Finecast, all I can say is I've had some really horrible examples of their metal models and I posted pics of them, but that's another can of worms I'm not much interested in rehashing. Suffice to say that I prefer Finecast... As for the fluff, I don't personally get the Lovecraftian thing. I suppose there's a sort of element of science versus that ancient eldritch horror kinda quality to some of his stuff that could tie into some of the old fluff, but for me, Lovecraft reads very differently than GW's older fluff. Hmmm... I'll have to give that some more thought. But fair enough.

As for the reason your friends left 8th, isn't that a significant change? I'm not a power gamer, I don't care for power games, and that attitude dominated 6th and 7th. Yes, 8th steered away from that whole approach to miniature gaming in favor of a system that puts more of an emphasis on the process of the game than the outcome. The term GW uses, I believe, is more "cinematic." Their departure from power gaming is exactly what brought me back to WFB. I own a copy of the Hordes rulebook. Just doesn't appeal to me at all, and the few games I've watched remind me all too much of WFB 7th.

As for the details being subject to opinion, unless you have some hard demographics on exactly who is buying what and where, all you have is conjecture, not facts. And unless you got some kind of polling to determine the "why's" of how groups are spending then you're still missing a piece of the puzzle. I've seen no such poll or any such concrete numbers, so I'm less convinced of your "facts." As for why I jumped into this thread? Fair question. I saw the attacks on Jezbot going from arguing against his points to becoming personal. I decided to point out that, outside this closed internet world, he's on solid ground and his views are pretty much the dominant view amongst unbiased analysts. Guess I just felt there needed to be a counter to the kind of speculation that was being offered up. Beyond that, I just got caught up in the conversation.

As for GW’s supposed target demographic, they’ve stated too many times that they have no specific target age group. I’ve seen no real evidence to believe they’re lying. The only people that seem to ever make that claim are those that are generally critical of the company as though it adds some weight to their criticisms. To me, it just comes off as sour grapes.
The way I see it, PP and Mantic found an eager audience in GW’s outcasts. That’s a good thing. While I don’t like their games myself, I think competition is basically good. That’s exactly why GW’s product has improved. Finecast, while you may not like it, was a rather bold departure from their tried and tested metals. That alone shows a company trying to reinvent itself and willing to take risks. Moving away from a game system that emphasized competition at a time when the most vocal complaint against the game was that it was to unbalanced to be really competitive was also rather bold. Companies that entrench themselves in some tried and true formula often find themselves left behind in their industry. Just look at the US automotive industry to see what I mean. GW seems to recognize the need for change and the need to evolve in the face of its competition. Not everything will appeal to everyone, but GW is obviously reaching an audience somewhere….

@ Ianrak...

I'm not trying to defend GW's corporate management, though I'm sure it comes off that way. I don't follow the company that closely. They may all be scum, but like them or not, the investement community is not sharing your doom and gloom. Like them or not, they control that design team and bean counters don't like change. The the design team seems to have quite a bit if latitude. (and much of the moaning I see here IS directed directed at them, not corporate. Just say something positive about Mat Ward if you don't believe me)

I spent many years on the trade desk for one of the largest banks in the world. I learned that speculation on where a company is going to be in 5 to 10 years is a completely pointless task. All that matters is what they are doing now and what they plan to do tomorrow. It's either working or not. Guessing just gets you in trouble. That's the investment professional in me talking. I don't buy into the mantra of holding onto a loosing bet for the long haul on the hopes it my turn around later.

The gamer in mee doesn't much care what management is doing, All the gamer in me cares about is whether I'm having a good time or not. When the company was pushing rules like 6th and 7th WFB I found other things to do. Now that they've gone in a different direction, I've bought two new armies. No, I don't like paying higher prices, but then who does? So yes, I buy far less than I used to. I don't forsee ever owning an 8000 to 9000 army again and I no longer automaticlly switch to the next edition. My friends and I have a pact to stay with what we have untill everyone agrees to switch. But that said, in the here and now, I'm willing to part with some of my hard earned money to get some of the new offerings... And I don't think I'm that much different than a lot of the people out there playing.

If GW folded tomorrow, I'd continue to play with what I have. Beyond that, I have alot of other hobbies too.

Also remember... Companies that are new and small find it much easier to be in touch with its audience and much easier to react to what they want. It's far easier to grow that small company. If either PP or Mantic get to GW's stature, they'll be a very different entity by then than they are now. That's just the nature of the beast. There is always a point that the visionaries have to give way to the bean counters if a company is going to continue to grow.

[AGC]

As for GW’s supposed target demographic, they’ve stated too many times that they have no specific target age group.

I'd be really interested in reading the source for this, since Blongbling and other ex-GW staffers have stated they target the teen-age group, can you provide a link? Thanks.

[BigDuke6]

I like the explanation Jo-Jo. Granted I have no grasp of economics anyway!!! Can I steall this and give it to a friend?

[Reinholt]

As for the details being subject to opinion, unless you have some hard demographics on exactly who is buying what and where, all you have is conjecture, not facts. And unless you got some kind of polling to determine the "why's" of how groups are spending then you're still missing a piece of the puzzle. I've seen no such poll or any such concrete numbers, so I'm less convinced of your "facts." As for why I jumped into this thread? Fair question. I saw the attacks on Jezbot going from arguing against his points to becoming personal. I decided to point out that, outside this closed internet world, he's on solid ground and his views are pretty much the dominant view amongst unbiased analysts. Guess I just felt there needed to be a counter to the kind of speculation that was being offered up. Beyond that, I just got caught up in the conversation.

I would suggest this view is not realistic.

There is no view on GW outside of the companies that own significant amounts of their stock; it's a tiny, tiny small cap in the British market. Nobody cares. You have a single report from Wright out there (who, coincidentally, have an office in the UK and have significant private clients and small to mid size institutions, some of whom own GW stock), and your Thompson-Reuters aggregation style report that basically cranks out market metrics and gives you talking point summaries which may or may not be factually accurate. So your "outside" view is a small guy servicing insiders/majority holders and a robot. Oh, and I have a Motley Fool article about them from 2003, where Kirby refers to the business as selling toy soldiers.

Find me a single analyst report that actually takes GW apart and discusses their business model. Not the one pagers you get from your broker or Reuters when someone is trying to offload a position and needs other people to buy. Go pull me some research from Goldman, Barcap, either of the Morgans, CS, or any of the legitimate buy-side shops and show me what people think. Link to that research report or put a PDF up somewhere. Let's see it.

As reference, I just searched for GW research reports on my Bloomberg terminal. There is nothing listed. On Bloomberg. Which is only the international standard for this stuff. I can't find anything in any of the research I get from companies on the street either.

In short, pics or it didn't happen.

[chamelion 6]

I would suggest this view is not realistic.

There is no view on GW outside of the companies that own significant amounts of their stock; it's a tiny, tiny small cap in the British market. Nobody cares. You have a single report from Wright out there (who, coincidentally, have an office in the UK and have significant private clients and small to mid size institutions, some of whom own GW stock), and your Thompson-Reuters aggregation style report that basically cranks out market metrics and gives you talking point summaries which may or may not be factually accurate. So your "outside" view is a small guy servicing insiders/majority holders and a robot. Oh, and I have a Motley Fool article about them from 2003, where Kirby refers to the business as selling toy soldiers.

Find me a single analyst report that actually takes GW apart and discusses their business model. Not the one pagers you get from your broker or Reuters when someone is trying to offload a position and needs other people to buy. Go pull me some research from Goldman, Barcap, either of the Morgans, CS, or any of the legitimate buy-side shops and show me what people think. Link to that research report or put a PDF up somewhere. Let's see it.

As reference, I just searched for GW research reports on my Bloomberg terminal. There is nothing listed. On Bloomberg. Which is only the international standard for this stuff. I can't find anything in any of the research I get from companies on the street either.

In short, pics or it didn't happen.

No, you're right, there isn't much out there. I'll say you're pretty much right about most reporting services. And what is out there I don't put much faith in either. But here's the thing. Working on a trade desk you develop a certain perspective on this stuff and you see a lot of strategies get ugly. I've seen more than a few very competent analysts make some really questionable trades simply because their personal view of a company or industry clouded their professional view. They were just too close to the subject to get a valid perspective. (Can you say Chase, anyone?) They’d had their opinion set before they even started their research and simply found the numbers that supported their bias. Next thing you know you’re a billion or two in the hole… It happened way, way too often. Those reports are valid for what they are and as far as they go, which is here and now and maybe tomorrow. At least they are unbiased and I relied on them heavily for just that reason. I don’t believe in the “buy and ride it out” strategies most advisors advocate. Then again, my experience is working a trade desk and I dealt with the market one trade and one minute at a time. If you’re going to go that route, invest in mutual funds so at least someone is watching the store for you… But these are just generalities. Nothing replaces doing your own research and knowing what you’re getting into.

As for who GW targets, I can only say I remember reading they target no specific age group, so take it for what it’s worth. A comment that they “sell toy soldiers” doesn’t really point to a demographic though. And it’s essentially accurate. I was looking over the website earlier and I don’t see the targeting kids element. Their marketing isn’t all that different than anybody else’s from what I see. It’s certainly not Saturday morning cartoonish. Can you give me a specific example of something they produced that you feel targets kids specifically? That way we can discuss the pros and cons of something specific and not just a general idea.

[paddyalexander]

In short, pics or it didn't happen.

Thats not good enough for chamelion 6, in the finecast thread he refused to acknowlage that there were any problems with the material and that photos weren't good enough, insisting that he would only believe them if the model is in his hands. He then posted pictures of plastic models as proof of his flawless finecasts. He then started insisting that metal models suffered the same problems at the same wide spread scale because he got some miscasts over the years.

His opinion is that there is nothing wrong with gwPLC. To him this is enough to be fact. He doesn't believe that gwPLC are loosing any customers and are in fact expanding thanks to their "trail blazing" buisiness practices. As far as he is concerned nothing will change that view. He hasn't reached his fanboy breaking point with the gwPLC pricing, rules/fluff writing & general customer treatment yet. I'm interested to see how many more price rises that will take for him.

The is that gwPLCs' customer base is shrinking and has been consistantly for the past 5-6 years, thier own financial reports show this, 20% price incres are not equaling a 20% increase in revenue. But that horse has been flogged to death.

Some leave the wargaming hobby altogether. In this case gwPLC, thier competitors and the wargaming community as a whole looses out.

Some leave the gwPLC Hobby TM niche and join the broader wargaming hobby. In this case gwPLC looses out but their competitors benifit while the wargaming community as a whole remains largely uneffected.

Some stay in the gwPLC Hobby TM and play the game but only buy second hand models or from alternate minitures manufacturers. This still helps gwPLC because it maintains the player base in a community.

The social aspect of the wargaming hobby means that the games where it is easy to find opponents for will usually thrive. I enjoy Flames of War and Infinity but in Cork where I live there are very few players and so the game is unlikely to be picked up by people looking for a game to play, also nowhere local sells those games. In Dublin where the game is carried by an indie retailer there are small communities for each game and so are more viable and attractive to be picked up by new gamers or by veteran gamers looking for new games. This is currently the biggest advantage that gwPLC have with 40k & WHFB. They are played and sold almost everywhere.

However it is a disservice to many great wargames companies that are experiencing unprecidented growth over the last few years that many in the community attribute this success to gwPLCs' failures. It is a part of it but these companies are doing many things that gwPLC refuse to do or no longer does, like directly communicating with their communities, supporting indie retailers (both B&M and online), reasonable pricing (including running sales), open play testing, free rules and a plethora of other practices. There are many gamers in these systems who have never played a gwPLC game before and are being introduced to wargaming through games like FoW, Infinity, Warmachine, Hoardes, Dust, KoW and Malifaux.

The simple fact that if you go into an indie games store for the first time to browse your choice of game will be dictated by the price, the asthethic appeal of the models plus the scale of the game (different to every person) and what games are being visibly played in the store. In more and more communities these factors are swinging to the negitive as far as gwPLC is concerned.

[chamelion 6]

Paddy, tell you what, I say what I believe, and you stick to saying what you believe. Especially since your assessment of what I believe is completely wrong.

I'll summarize it for you...

In the Finecast thread I said I believe the problems with it are exagerated, not nonexistant. A small number of photos collected from people all over the road only prove that a given number number of prople all over the world got some bad casts. We have no idea how many figures have even been distributed so we have no measure to guage what percentage those few represent. So I'm saying thatwhat you call a fact isn't supported by your evidence.

In this case, I'm stating that the premise that a 20% price hike should translate into a 20% increase in revinue is silly. To say that their customer base in decreasing based just on that one notion is laughable in the extreme. there are literaly hundreds of reasons that equation might not work. And even if we conclude that the base is shrinking can you tell me how many of thos people left because of price increases? How many left because they prefered the competition? How many left because they no longer have the time? Or how many no longer have anybody to play with? or how many simply died? or how many... You get the idea.

I've presented NO facts, unless maybe you consider my like to Reuters to show they were recomending GW as a buy as a fact. None. I've not even said what my opinion of GW is, so how can you possibley know what I think???? The most I've said is that whether you like what they are doing right now or not, they at least aren't sitting still. They are trying new things. Finecast was a rather bold venture on their part. Whether it pays off remainst to be seen.

Just because somebody questions what you present as a "fact" says nothing about what their opinion of the situation is or whether they agree or disagree with the premise. Only that they question your "facts."

So here is what you can say you KNOW about where I stand. I prefer Finecast to metal and I like the current direction the rules and miniatures are heading. I'm not sure that makes me a fanboy any more than your constant negative opinion of GW makes you a hater, does it?

So what I'm saying here is that what you call "facts" fall short of the absolute truths you may believe they are.

[Torga_DW]

Universal truth? Proof? No, just a comment that somewhere between 6th and 7th the game died here and 8th brought a revival. Take it for what it's worth.

Before 8th edition came down the road WFB was a dead game system.

Perhaps i misunderstood, if so my apologies.

I'm having a conversation, not trying to debate. But then that's what I didn't like about 7th. Everybody seemed to want to debate everything all the time and had some point to prove. That's not my cup of tea.

As for why I jumped into this thread? Fair question. I saw the attacks on Jezbot going from arguing against his points to becoming personal.

Its a public forum, not everyone will agree. Thats when i start looking for the facts. People raised legitimate questions, jezbot has so far not addressed them. The rest is largely subjective.

As for the fluff, I don't personally get the Lovecraftian thing. I suppose there's a sort of element of science versus that ancient eldritch horror kinda quality to some of his stuff that could tie into some of the old fluff, but for me, Lovecraft reads very differently than GW's older fluff. Hmmm... I'll have to give that some more thought. But fair enough.

From my perspective: The masses of humanity are ignorant of the dark gods, who gaze upon them enviously and desire their realm. You've got the places where cults have sprung up with material power evident of the gods, much like the isolated fishing villages in lovecraft, with mutants and daemons lurking behind the scenes. People stumble upon or search for ancient books of power.

Yet the establishment can't even warn people about the dangers, for fear it will make the situation worse. Humanity is (was) slowly losing a massive, continual war with more and more enemies showing up (like the tyranids and necrons), who have (or had in the necrons case) their own particular brand of ancient, unknowable evil backstory. Necrons had the potential to be really cool with some refinement.

When people won victories against the horrors of the galaxy, it was always at great cost and the heroes usually died in the process, and if they were really unlucky it would end with their souls being subject to eternal torment.

Now we have draigo, cursed by the gods to be ubersauce for all eternity, single-handedly carving names on the hearts of demon primarchs. Necrons and blood angels bro-fisting (see attachment). Grey knights who are so ultimately pure that they have a branch who are ultimately ultimately pure (purifiers). The standard marine chapters all wishing they were ultramarines, and sad because they know they'll never be that good. All examples of current fluff.

As for the reason your friends left 8th, isn't that a significant change? I'm not a power gamer, I don't care for power games, and that attitude dominated 6th and 7th. Yes, 8th steered away from that whole approach to miniature gaming in favor of a system that puts more of an emphasis on the process of the game than the outcome. The term GW uses, I believe, is more "cinematic." Their departure from power gaming is exactly what brought me back to WFB. I own a copy of the Hordes rulebook. Just doesn't appeal to me at all, and the few games I've watched remind me all too much of WFB 7th.

Its a significant consequence, but that doesn't mean the rules have changed significantly. I've only really been following fantasy since about 5th, but in all that time the rule changes between editions are relatively minor. As i said before, in both systems, the core mechanics are basically the same since their creation, over 25 years ago. Even lord / war of the rings is heavily based on it. For the record, i'm not a fan of powergaming either, but its my local meta. I have three basic choices: powergame, almost certainly lose every game, or not play at all.

As for the details being subject to opinion, unless you have some hard demographics on exactly who is buying what and where, all you have is conjecture, not facts.

The say math is the pure language. Let me express the situation as reported from their annual reports. a = average price, b = gross sales, c = total income. (A x B) = C. Both sides of the equation must balance, thats a mathematical law. So when we increase the value of A (which is done at least yearly), and C (total income) remains largely the same, we have to balance the equation to equal out, which can only be done by lowering the value of b: gross sales. As customers, we have access to A, and every year we get access to their annual report which gives C. This is not conjecture, this is (basic) math.

The demographics on exactly what proportions of who is buying things would be interesting for sure, but irrelevant to the math showing that they are losing customers.

And unless you got some kind of polling to determine the "why's" of how groups are spending then you're still missing a piece of the puzzle. I've seen no such poll or any such concrete numbers, so I'm less convinced of your "facts."

'Why' is interesting, but you're right, we don't have that. That doesn't mean that what we do have is meaningless. We have their (increasingly obfuscated) annual reports, which basically say that despite yearly above-inflation price increases, their income is largely the same. Unless you're suggesting they're cooking the books, the reports are factually accurate.

As for why I jumped into this thread? Fair question. I saw the attacks on Jezbot going from arguing against his points to becoming personal. I decided to point out that, outside this closed internet world, he's on solid ground and his views are pretty much the dominant view amongst unbiased analysts. Guess I just felt there needed to be a counter to the kind of speculation that was being offered up. Beyond that, I just got caught up in the conversation.

I try not to take sides, so i ask the question: if his views are on solid ground, why did he not respond to the questions raised?

As for GW’s supposed target demographic, they’ve stated too many times that they have no specific target age group. I’ve seen no real evidence to believe they’re lying. The only people that seem to ever make that claim are those that are generally critical of the company as though it adds some weight to their criticisms. To me, it just comes off as sour grapes.

The first page of a google search: games workshop's target audience

http://www.infobarrel.com/Games_Work...stomer_Service
"Although their target audience is younger teenagers...."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_Workshop
Following a management buyout in December 1991, the company refocused on their most lucrative lines, namely their miniature wargame Warhammer Fantasy Battle (WFB) and Warhammer 40,000 (WH40K). The retail chain refocused on a younger, more family-oriented market.

http://wargamestuff.blogspot.com.au/...-problems.html
Games Workshop's target market is somewhat different than most other wargaming companies. The focus is on 12-16 year olds, 10-18 at the outside, who are just starting out with wargaming, do not come from a gaming background and have no knowledge of any other gaming companies.

Then theres the anecdotal evidence that shows up from time to time here from ex-gw staff members who were higher up the food chain. Can you provide anything to support your position?

The way I see it, PP and Mantic found an eager audience in GW’s outcasts.

I'd say there were numerous reasons. Tabletop miniature gaming existed long before GW, people playing other games haven't necessarily been involved with GW previously.

That’s a good thing. While I don’t like their games myself, I think competition is basically good. That’s exactly why GW’s product has improved.

I agree with competition, but i haven't seen any substantive improvement from GW's product.

Finecast, while you may not like it, was a rather bold departure from their tried and tested metals. That alone shows a company trying to reinvent itself and willing to take risks.

GW stated the switch to finecast was due to the rising and fluctuating cost of metal. They did it to improve their bottom line. Then applied the usual spin. Meanwhile, we're still seeing obvious examples of product that shouldn't have passed the multiple stages of quality control.

[QUOTE=chamelion 6;6288024] Moving away from a game system that emphasized competition at a time when the most vocal complaint against the game was that it was to unbalanced to be really competitive was also rather bold.

I won't go into detail on the numerous issues that pop up on this board on a regular basis. But again, i've seen no real changes, just minor shifts from one problem to another. A couple examples off the top of my head: Magic and the 6th spells are still contentious. Power level of tomb kings vs other armies, especially vampire counts. Cannon mechanics. True line of sight vs scenic bases. Unresolved rules questions, some starting with the first army book to come out for this edition.

Companies that entrench themselves in some tried and true formula often find themselves left behind in their industry. Just look at the US automotive industry to see what I mean. GW seems to recognize the need for change and the need to evolve in the face of its competition.

I agree with the former but see no evidence of the latter.

Not everything will appeal to everyone, but GW is obviously reaching an audience somewhere….

True, and to bring the point back again, that audience is shrinking. Interpretation of why, and what it will mean, i don't know.

edit: dang, forgot the attachment.... here tis:

[Torga_DW]

In the Finecast thread I said I believe the problems with it are exagerated, not nonexistant. A small number of photos collected from people all over the road only prove that a given number number of prople all over the world got some bad casts. We have no idea how many figures have even been distributed so we have no measure to guage what percentage those few represent. So I'm saying thatwhat you call a fact isn't supported by your evidence.

Entirely correct. But there are multiple stages of quality control in such a process, so it asks the question: how did so many of these models, from this one thread alone, make it to the customer? Something is very wrong here.

In this case, I'm stating that the premise that a 20% price hike should translate into a 20% increase in revinue is silly. To say that their customer base in decreasing based just on that one notion is laughable in the extreme. there are literaly hundreds of reasons that equation might not work.

Its simple math, as i showed above. both sides of the equation need to balance. A x B = C. If you increase the value of A, the value of C has to increase.

And even if we conclude that the base is shrinking can you tell me how many of thos people left because of price increases? How many left because they prefered the competition? How many left because they no longer have the time? Or how many no longer have anybody to play with? or how many simply died? or how many... You get the idea.

The why is largely irrelevant to the what. At one point, GW was growing its player base. Now its shrinking it. I would like to know why, but am unlikely to find out. GW has stated due to its niche market that it is largely unaffected by the global financial situation.

I've presented NO facts, unless maybe you consider my like to Reuters to show they were recomending GW as a buy as a fact. None. I've not even said what my opinion of GW is, so how can you possibley know what I think???? The most I've said is that whether you like what they are doing right now or not, they at least aren't sitting still. They are trying new things. Finecast was a rather bold venture on their part. Whether it pays off remainst to be seen.

Thats largely the problem i'm having. You have an opinion with no attempts to support it. I follow the facts, if you can provide them i'll happily re-evaluate my position and consider i might be wrong. As i mentioned above, their bold venture with finecast was based on cost-cutting. The short-term results to date being highly noticable compared to their metal predecessors.

Just because somebody questions what you present as a "fact" says nothing about what their opinion of the situation is or whether they agree or disagree with the premise. Only that they question your "facts."

Opinions are subjective. Facts are objective. There was once a largely held opinion that the earth was flat. That opinion was wrong. I prefer the facts, where-ever they may lead me.

So what I'm saying here is that what you call "facts" fall short of the absolute truths you may believe they are.

Its not so much that he's misrepresenting facts, as you are refusing to believe or even consider them. As i said, people once knew that the earth was flat. There was no convincing them with words. And yet, it eventually turned out that the earth was indeed round. The facts were there, for those willing to investigate for themselves.

[paddyalexander]

No matter how superior the new material is, there will be a sizeable number of people that will find a problem... Even if it the perception that it's too perfect.

When did I say Finecast was "too perfect?" I said I believe Fincast is no better or worse than the metals as far as the failure rate and, in my opinion, fare easier to work with. Nobody complained about the metals because they were the status quo... The alternative being?

You asked, "are miscasts more common in Finecast than they were in metal?" Perhaps, but personally, I don't think so... At least I see no evidence of it. In my experience it's all pictures on the internet and some anecdotal stories.

As for the annual report? That thing got stretched and tossed and twisted to show all kinds of bad stuff... Bottom line is what I see and put my hands on...

Can you provide proof of anybody returning a Finecast mini 6 times?

IIRC one WarSeer member has returned the Marneus Calgar and Honour Guard box not six but ten times.

Especially given that at least half of the photos I've seen show the same flaws that were present on the metal version of the model and have nothing to do with the casting material. It's not a question of people lying, it's a question of whether the evidence presented proves the whole line is crap or not... At this point I'd be pretty comfortable mail ordering it... I guess you wouldn't.

I'll leave out the part where you flawless fincast model ended up being a plastic character. The simple fact of the matter is that you are following the same pattern in this thread. You are saying that the evidence we are presented with, in this case the annual financial reports, are not an accurate source and then presenting your own opinions on the matter as fact, which are based soley on your own personal experience.. You won't believe anything that contradicts your oppinions. You present nothing solid to the discussion, just denying that the presented evidence is not valid and that anyone who thinks differently is wrong. Don't get me wrong, you are perfectly free to have your own opinion but instead of expressing it you instead attack or outright dissmiss the opinions of others.

What was bold about finecast? Resin models have been produced by other companies for decades. The only thing I can think off is the fact (I sould really stop using that word as it has no meaning to you) that they moved to a cheeper material and had the cheek to increase the price of the product. The fact that they are using a production process not suitable to the material is very bold... no whats that other word? Oh right Idiotic.

If you can prove to me that your stance has validity, as you have asked people to do many times in the past yourself then I may even come around to your point of view.

Back on topic(ish)
What could gwPLC do to turn the tide, to continue to generate healthy short term profits while stimulating growth of their buisiness and making the long term outlook more positive?

Here is some things that come to mind:
Redo the Battleforces so that each contains a small complete force that is balanced to play against other Battleforces. Including a "quickstart" ruleset and rules for the models (even in a cut down form) would help the games emmensly. Almost all of the other games companies out there that are growing have army starter boxes for their games that contain all of the information you need to start playing and are reasonably balanced against other starters. A buddy and I were both able to buy a Dystopian Wars box each and without knowing much about each faction or even the army construction rules were able to throw the contents down on the table and have a blast learning the rules. Making this introductury ruleset fun should be the priority, being representitive of the core rules of the game but making tweeks and adjustments to make sure it provides an enjoyable experience at a small points level. These rules would then allow the new player to transition to the full rules when they have enough models and experience to do so.

Currently gwPLCs' games require you to buy the rule book, the army book or codex and then multiple expensive boxsets, even including a Battleforce just to have enough models to play a game at a representitive points level. The current cost to get an army in either core system to a recomended points level (following the ruleset) is staggering and will put off a lot of people who otherwise would have been interested in joining our hobby.

The biggest stumbling block I see in gwPLCs' future is that they don't have a lot of new gamers/hobbiests/customers joining them and less of those stay as long term customers. In the meantime they are loosing their long term customers for a variety of reasons. This could at least offset that problem by allowing gwPLC to bring in new customers at a rate faster than they are loosing them. It would also allow them to make the core rules more appealling to veteran gamers.

[chamelion 6]

Here's the deal. My opinion of GW's business practices is irrelevant. I’m not trying to change yours or anybody else’s mind. I have no goods to sell here. I really don’t care whether you change your mind or not. You seem to be operating on the fallacy that because I disagree with something you present that I must be trying to convince people of some opposite or different idea. You keep trying to bate me into tossing out some idea that you can tear into to discredit. I don't want people to believe anything because I say it. I want people to think critically about the ideas presented here and not just believe something because it sounds good on the surface.

You and others have this idea you’re trying to sell, that is that GW as a corporate entity is self-destructing and you present your “facts.” I read those facts and asked, “did your evidence support your conclusion?” In my opinion, it fell well short. I gave my reasoning, your time horizon is simply too far out to be meaningful, in my opinion. There is too much unpredictability between now and then. Also there is no mechanism to test the validity of your idea. It’s a prediction based solely on a part of an annual report. If I can’t prove it wrong, then it cannot be proven correct. I may as well look into a crystal ball. It’s not any more or less valid than any other prediction.

As for the Finecast thing. It’s obvious that some people are getting bad casts. I never disputed that. But then there were claims that it was most of the production, that it was all bad, and so on, and so on… So again, does the evidence presented support those claims? Again, in my opinion, no. A few hundred photos only tell the story of a few hundred minis. But that’s out of how many world wide. A few hundred out of a thousand? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000,000? I have nothing to gauge those few hundred photos. That is then compounded by the fact that almost anybody that challenges the idea that Finecast in that thread is personally attacked and ultimately driven off, it’s not really even a balanced anecdotal assessment of the situation. Without hard numbers, you got nothin’.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying that your evidence is falling short of justifying your claim, which is not the same thing. As you are making the claim, and not me, it falls on you to justify your position. The idea that you’re right unless I prove you wrong is backwards. All I have to do is throw doubt on your facts. Of course, everyone else is capable of making up their own minds about this discussion. I completely leave it to them to judge for themselves.

You see, I’m not trying to prove anything. Just saying your case in both situations, from where I stand is unconvincing. It falls short of the mark. You might be right; then again, a meteor may end life as we know it in the next 10 years.

But I do wonder, if I’m a nut or a troll, why is so much effort spent trying to discredit me?

[Omniassiah]

You and others have this idea you’re trying to sell, that is that GW as a corporate entity is self-destructing and you present your “facts.” I read those facts and asked, “did your evidence support your conclusion?” In my opinion, it fell well short. I gave my reasoning, your time horizon is simply too far out to be meaningful, in my opinion. There is too much unpredictability between now and then. Also there is no mechanism to test the validity of your idea. It’s a prediction based solely on a part of an annual report. If I can’t prove it wrong, then it cannot be proven correct. I may as well look into a crystal ball. It’s not any more or less valid than any other prediction.

You see, I’m not trying to prove anything. Just saying your case in both situations, from where I stand is unconvincing. It falls short of the mark. You might be right; then again, a meteor may end life as we know it in the next 10 years.

The thing with long term projections is that they are usually worth crap when dealing with companies that are truly dynamic entities. I couldn't give you an accurate assessment of say Apple, Samsung, LG because they are constantly evolving moving into new areas and trying to make their older products more available. They may have something in the pipeline that could be the next big thing or it could cost them hundreds of millions of dollars. GW however doesn't really do anything shocking anymore. Most of the stuff they do has been done before, They play the safe route. The other company out there that probably best matches GW right now is Blizzard. Both are now a step behind their competitors, they are both still solid in the short run because of a massive previous fan base that is loyal to the point of being stupid sometimes(I've been there myself in GWs case) and the ability to put out a product that is at least solidly average. However, both are doing things that are slowly disillusioning their existing fanbase. Neither company are viable in the long term, I think that Blizzard has a longer life to them (10-15yrs) before being bought out, while GW is looking closer to the 5-10yr.

Now of course this is all speculation on the assumption that neither doesn't doing something absolutely stunning that revitalizes their market. But by definition since we are saying that they have to do that in order to prove us wrong, they would prove us right. Right now GW really needs to do something that will make them a leader in something other then cost. They aren't leading in miniature quality anymore, they have been trailing in book appearance for sometime, their rules don't really fit into any category anymore and there is generally a better rule set out there for what you want, their stores at least in the US are a Joke, as well as the ones in the UK and EU that I have visited. So the question becomes what will GW do to put itself back on top because as time goes on Players will gravitate to the companies that produce what they are looking for and right now GW doesn't shine in anyone area. You can get better sculpts from several companies for about the same price, or get sculpts that are about the same for less. Options are out there and they are being used more and more by more people.

End result is that GW is not at the point of no return. However; they are on a course towards it. They can change the course or they can stay on the path. With the trends of GW historically it probably will be too little to late. I hope not because I used to really enjoy their games but I've found some that are a lot better for me.

[paddyalexander]

But I do wonder, if I’m a nut or a troll, why is so much effort spent trying to discredit me?

If I tought you were nut or a troll I would simply change my settings to ignore your posts. I'm not trying to discredit you but I am trying to understand your point of view. Again you failed to present any evidence to support your own point of view whilst repeatibly saying that the evidence being presented is not enough to convince you of others point of view. Because right now it is looking like you aren't presenting anything because there you have nothing to present. All you have done so far in this thread and previously in the finecast thread is dismiss the evidence being presented while providing nothing of your own. The only time you tried doing so was posting pictures of your perfect finecast miniture only for it to be plastic.

Typicaly you'll make statements like metal had just as many problems as finecast and have it followed by dozens of other posts disagreeing with you & none that do. Same happened in this thread with your dismissal of gwPLCs' target demographic. You post your opinion with no basis in reality whilst Torga_DW goes to the trouble of posting three different sources with the correct information everyone else has based their view points on. But this is evidence that hasn't been placed directly into your hands so you can ignore it, right?

[Torga_DW]

Here's the deal. My opinion of GW's business practices is irrelevant.

Agreed. Largely due to it not being based on reality.

You seem to be operating on the fallacy that because I disagree with something you present that I must be trying to convince people of some opposite or different idea.

No, i was operating on the fallacy that you were looking to be part of a reasoned and informed discussion. Clearly i was wrong.

You keep trying to bate me into tossing out some idea that you can tear into to discredit.

I keep asking you to substantiate your claims. You seem to think i want to 'tear into' you. What a sad little man you must be to think this.

I don't want people to believe anything because I say it.

We don't.

I want people to think critically about the ideas presented here and not just believe something because it sounds good on the surface.

Which requires facts and supporting evidence. You have none of this. Making your statement rather hypocritical, since your position is something that only: sounds good on the surface.

You and others have this idea you’re trying to sell, that is that GW as a corporate entity is self-destructing and you present your “facts.”

You're attacking a position i never held? Nice. Yes, whenever i make claims i usually like to provide evidence, either proving my opinion or at least showing others where i'm coming from and what i'm thinking so they may identify where i might be going wrong. You're quite welcome to deny easily verifiable facts, but that reflects on you, not me.

I read those facts and asked, “did your evidence support your conclusion?” In my opinion, it fell well short. I gave my reasoning, your time horizon is simply too far out to be meaningful, in my opinion. There is too much unpredictability between now and then. Also there is no mechanism to test the validity of your idea. It’s a prediction based solely on a part of an annual report. If I can’t prove it wrong, then it cannot be proven correct. I may as well look into a crystal ball. It’s not any more or less valid than any other prediction.

Is this directed at anyone in particular? Me? I suspect it is, but given the raving and lack of relevance to any of my posts, i'm not sure. But FYI, long term planning has been done for a very long time, there's a science around it. I won't waste either of our time giving you the 'facts'.

That is then compounded by the fact that almost anybody that challenges the idea that Finecast in that thread is personally attacked and ultimately driven off, it’s not really even a balanced anecdotal assessment of the situation.

I think you were attacked and driven off for posting a plastic mini and claiming it was a perfect finecast. It comes back to that whole evidence and substantiation thing that you dislike.

Without hard numbers, you got nothin’.

This is just out of mild interest for anyone else who might be reading this. There are actually many forms of data: empirical, quantifiable, etc. Some are more reliable than others, but when you've 'got nothin', anything can be of value. See attached link for a brief overview. Conversely, it's possible to collect 'hard numbers' that are totally meaningless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_analysis

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying that your evidence is falling short of justifying your claim, which is not the same thing.

The evidence is largely undeniable. That you deny it is a reflection on you. Again, i refer to the people that knew the earth was flat.

As you are making the claim, and not me, it falls on you to justify your position.

And i have done so. For your arguments to have any merit, you are now required to justify your position.

The idea that you’re right unless I prove you wrong is backwards.

No that's pretty much how it works. People gather evidence of the differing positions and compare them to make an informed decision which idea is most likely right. That you refuse to even attempt to contribute anything of substance doesn't strengthen your position, it weakens it.

All I have to do is throw doubt on your facts. Of course, everyone else is capable of making up their own minds about this discussion. I completely leave it to them to judge for themselves.

Yes, and i'm certain they'll see the difference between what i'm saying and showing, and what you've been doing.

You see, I’m not trying to prove anything. Just saying your case in both situations, from where I stand is unconvincing. It falls short of the mark. You might be right; then again, a meteor may end life as we know it in the next 10 years.

Again, i refer to the people who believed the earth was flat. Clearly facts have no place in your (flat) little world.

But I do wonder, if I’m a nut or a troll, why is so much effort spent trying to discredit me?

Actually, i spent a good amount of effort holding off from judging you, and giving you time to substantiate your positions so they could be judged fairly for the purpose of re-evaluating my beliefs. The discrediting? You've been discrediting yourself.

But as i said earlier, i follow the facts, wherever they may lead me. I've gathered enough from this conversation that you're probably socially maladapted irl, for which i pity you. But given the following statements:

I've presented NO facts

You see, I’m not trying to prove anything.

You are most definitely a troll. Congratulations, you got me. I was trolled hard. Another proud moment for humanity. I leave you to continue your trolling: you've beaten me, you've 'won' the thread. gg.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cdiz0k0Rudw

[Trasvi]

In this case, I'm stating that the premise that a 20% price hike should translate into a 20% increase in revinue is silly. To say that their customer base in decreasing based just on that one notion is laughable in the extreme. there are literaly hundreds of reasons that equation might not work. And even if we conclude that the base is shrinking can you tell me how many of thos people left because of price increases? How many left because they prefered the competition? How many left because they no longer have the time? Or how many no longer have anybody to play with? or how many simply died? or how many... You get the idea.

I'm not going to try to vilify you or anything, but I do think some of your premises in this argument are a little flawed.
Presumably, people have been dying throughout GW's entire history, and they are replaced by new players. Similarly, individual people have been growing up, running out of time, etc for the last 30 years, but before this have been compensated for by influx of new people who are younger, have more time, or whatever. But now we have seen some significant changes in GW's sales patterns. I'll use Australia because I know it better than the UK, but last year GW recorded a decrease in sales of nearly 12% (before exchange rates), and that doesn't factor in the price rises.
The other points to your argument are also related. Why would someone who has been playing GW 'leave for the competition', or new players start with non-GW companies? A simple answer would be that GW isn't providing value for money anymore, but their competitors are. Similarly, having no-one left to play with is a huge indicator of GW's network externalities: the more people playing GW, the more valuable their product is. If not enough new blood is deciding to play GW that there is no longer a network of gamers, GW has done something wrong now that they weren't doing before. And considering that about the only thing that GW has changed in the last few years are their prices...
I don't think anyone is claiming that a 20% price hike should translate to a 20% increase in revenue. However it should translate to *some* increase in revenue. If it doesn't, then that is a fairly clear economic indicator that prices should have at least remained the same, or decreased to increase revenue.
Given the inherently social nature of wargaming, number of customers should increase faster than linearly with a drop in prices. A drop in prices would also go a long way to reducing a lot of GWs other problems - online reselling becomes less viable, secondhand market becomes less viable, competitors lose a lot of their price advantage, more people start playing and so more people start playing....