PDA

View Full Version : How GW may reduce its price?



akgaroth
21-04-2009, 18:58
In june as we all know GW will raise again its prices. Since I don't want to do/start a useless rant I'd like to discuss with you if there're some way to reduce the cost of production of GW material and, consequently, reduce its cost sell.

1) Army books: quit all the coloured section and print it in normal paper. I'm proposing it as I think that army books should only allow you to create an army list and know more fluff aspects of your army. Also, I think that the kind of paper GW use is due only for a better printing of those pages. Is quite obvious that is a quite expensive type of paper and since its a bit thicker than normal paper it may be also one of the causes of detaching sleeves.

The hobby material may be aggrupated in a single book, and they may do a small (about 10 pages) book with painting tips included in the hobby starter set, or that can be sold separately. Or putting all that in internet in their website.

2) Miniatures: ok, here there's the problem that would require the remake of all the models range. However it may be made in a larger period of time.

I was thinking boxes of 10/20 man of the core troops with only basic equipement with no CG or anything more. Along with this boxes they may create other boxes with all the decoration bits that may be used for your core troops or for create special units as you wish + the CG and small/cheap blisters with elements in metal to create your characters if you wish so.
The same thing may be made with units as trolls and ogres that appear in several armies, something like they did with the giant. So if you only want to add only more soldiers you don't have to pay for all the small bits and you may buy small bits of other armies to convert your models without paying the soldiers.
I don't know though how much GW will spend less than with the current boxes and how much they would reduce their price.

Do you have any other idea that may be used?

kairous
21-04-2009, 19:11
Some good points there my friend and i can see the logic behind them, but, don't be surprised if your thread gets merged with the price rise thread.

TBH i don't think GW would change the way they produce their products, they would probably put it down to the level of quality the customer deserves, or some **** like that :p

My 2p, i think GW should stop selling super glue, i bought it once, discovered it was useless (as so many of us have:rolleyes:), and now only use loctite to glue my metal to metal, resin, or metal to plastic, stuff likes cement.

Regarding the army books, you never know, if they print it on normal paper it might not fall apart as quick as some people have reported.

Kantur
21-04-2009, 19:25
Just a quick comment on the superglue, it's not fantastic, but it's a lot better if you leave the top off it for an hour or two so it becomes more of a gel than liquid.

Griefbringer
21-04-2009, 19:29
I would expect the books falling apart being rather an issue with the quality of hot gluing used to keep them apart, rather than having a whole lot to do with the paper. And AFAIK they have had occasional troubles with it for the last 20 years, with various printers. And it might be a topic worth looking at - replacing falling apart books can get a bit pricy, plus it annoys customers.

That said, GW does not want to look cheap: they want to look like an attractive quality product, with the whole integrated hobby aspect. Which is why they will keep colour sections in the army books.

akgaroth
21-04-2009, 19:48
I was trying to propose some options that may be cheaper in production but not cheap of what regards the visual result. Honestly, I think that no-one should be obliged to pay more for something he doesn't want and affects the price of the whole product.
And what do you think of my model range change idea? Do you have another ideas?

Max Jet
21-04-2009, 20:06
Make more money? Since the most expensive thing on a plastic kit are the molds, they could try to sell more Kits, after all.. the materials are pretty cheap.

They could attract more costumer and lower the prices but... oh never mind.

Griefbringer
21-04-2009, 20:51
I
I was thinking boxes of 10/20 man of the core troops with only basic equipement with no CG or anything more. Along with this boxes they may create other boxes with all the decoration bits that may be used for your core troops or for create special units as you wish + the CG and small/cheap blisters with elements in metal to create your characters if you wish so.


Have you seen the WH40K Space Marine chapter upgrade sprues (Black Templars, Dark Angels, Space Wolves) that are intended to be mixed with the vanilla space marines plastics? Space marines sell so much that they can actually afford producing such upgrade sprues.

Edit: with the new releases, plastic 40K Imperial guard will also sport something similar - basic 10 model kits for basic grunts, with additional upgrade boxes for heavy weapons and command squads.

However, as a general concept I do not really see any significant savings on your plan: the big cost issue with plastics is the design and production of the molds needed. So for it to produce savings, you would need to come up with a plan that would allow for the same model options to be produced with a smaller amount of molds needed, while keeping the sales per mold at least on the current level.

IJW
21-04-2009, 22:31
For what it's worth, production costs aren't very high anyway - staff and rent worldwide probably outstrip the production costs 3-4-fold.

venus_redscar
21-04-2009, 22:59
Quickest cost cutting measure, start stripping corporate management. I work at a company where we have trouble keeping prices because all us simple, uneducated folks on the bottom know there are dozen useless, annoying VPs above us who need their 100K plus salaries.

Seriously, what else does GW have that cheaper companies don't besides a bulky, worthless corporate structure?

Cane
21-04-2009, 23:55
Agreed with venus_redscar on corporate management salaries.

Another option could be selling, shutting down, or merging their GW stores throughout the world especially in cities with multiple stores or stores experiencing poor sales. GW undoubtedly has to pay a lot of money to keep their network of stores around so that could potentially free up a lot of cash just as long as the indie stores carry their product.

I'm just talking completely out of my ass here, but I think GW models have a pretty high margin on plastic kits since the raw material of plastic is low. Sure there is the plastic mold(s) investment but we still have pretty old designs floating around like the Catachans and the cost doesn't seem like much of a hurdle to overcome as the models sell themeselves. However GW seems to promote their product as the supercars of tabletop gaming and it'd hurt their prestige to offer lower prices.

Lewis
22-04-2009, 00:06
The cost gap of producing high or low quality books is far lower than the profit margin on a increased price, higher quality book. GW's plan is exactly the opposite of what you desrcribe: increase quality slighly to increase cost a greater amount. GW aren't pinioned by the cost of their product; shops, staff and shareholders yes but not product. If the ever wanted to lwer cost then they could do it by becoming mail order only. Which would be rubbish.

chivalrous
22-04-2009, 00:19
Agreed with venus_redscar on corporate management salaries.

Another option could be selling, shutting down, or merging their GW stores throughout the world especially in cities with multiple stores or stores experiencing poor sales. GW undoubtedly has to pay a lot of money to keep their network of stores around so that could potentially free up a lot of cash just along as the indie stores carry their product.


I thoroughly agree with this.
It's no coincidence that the price rises began fairly soon after the big store opening drive in the mid to late 90's.
The most expensive part of any business is the staff. It's not just wages, but National Insurance contributions (certainly in the UK), pension contributions, staff liability insurance.
Second are the utilities, mostly electricity here keeping the lights and the heating/air conditioning working.
Then there's the rent on the shops, which is going to be pretty hefty as GW does like to put its shops, for the most part, in prime areas and shopping malls.

But it's not so simple as just closing the store. As you say there need to be Indy's there to receive the GW's customers.
Because of that huge store opening drive in the late 90's that caused this mess, a lot of Indy's found at that point they couldn't compete, with what was at that stage a pretty and glossy and, most of all, parent and youngster friendly environment.

zedeyejoe
22-04-2009, 07:29
I did what I call 'follow the money'. So looked at GWs accounts and surprise surprise the biggest part of GW expenditure is Operating Costs at £77m compared to Cost of Sales (making the stuff) at £33m. So I suggest managing the biggest expense first.

And the biggest expense is Selling Costs at £44m, so I reckon thats the chain of stores.

Management pay works out at about £1m, so chicken feed really.

thinkerman
22-04-2009, 07:33
I personally dont think GW would ever want to make the hobby cheaper - why bother, people buy it no matter what.

Unless gamers, customers etc just STOP buying directly and in-directly from GW they will never do anything about the prices.

We can complain about the quality of the codex's now produced in china which fall apart after 5 mins, the stupidly expensive superglue which is thinned down before it goes into the pots at the factory, the minis per box being reduced from 20 to 10 on average but unless people STOP buying the stuff and profit margins decrease to nothing GW will not lift a finger - hell even then they would probs put another price rise in to increase profit or release a super kit hoping to get everyone buying it.

GW have lost touch with there core base of customers and gamers. A vast majority of miniature and wargaming companies like Renegade miniatures have LOWERED there cost prices due to raw matterial costs going down so why is GW bucking this trend and raising them - yes i know its there choice but surely this will only diminish there existing customer base given how touch the times are, your money not going further when army building and not wanting to pay more for something you already buy for x amount

Another point id like to make is "is the stuff actually worth the money you pay?"

Terminators are cool fantastic models but are they worth £25? or soon to be £30 given what ive been told with the plastic kits on the price rise? - is the hobby value for money anymore to joe bloggs on the street walking into the store or will we be seeing more children convinced to come into the hobby, who are there for 6 weeks buying bikes and 5 man squads, not interested in army books as its not miniatures who leave and jump on the next coolest thing with there mates?

Fenlear
22-04-2009, 18:31
Iím fairly certain GW could lower their prices without changing a thing to their production. Max Jet has the right idea. Rather then accepting themselves as a nitch market and trying to suck max profit out of the few remaining hard cores they should be trying to get the populous into the hobby. People keep saying that they couldnít get enough of an increase in customers to justify lower prices but I find this really hard to believe. In my playing circle we have 3 people playing with 8 moping around because they canít afford it. Every time I go into a GW shop thereís a sobbing kid being told by his mother (typically the only other people in the shop) that the stuff is too expensive. They are not a nitch market because there isnít interest; they are a nitch market because their prices make them so. Itís not like they would be missing out on the hard cores money anyways. They would still be spending ridiculous amounts, just getting more for their money. Price is killing their business but they have been told this for at least a decade and have only continued to raise prices. I give it less then another 10 years before they price themselves out of business completely. The final customer will be paying 1000$ for a regiment box.

zedeyejoe
22-04-2009, 18:38
They are not a nitch (sic) market because there isnít interest; they are a nitch market because their prices make them so.

Don't think so. You would be amazed how many people are not interested in model soldiers even if they were free.

Try the following experiment, stand on a street corner with 10 plastic GW figures and a box of chocolates. Offer passers by a chocolate or a plastic figure. Make a note of how many figures are left after all the chocolates are gone.

Fenlear
22-04-2009, 19:21
You can not think so all you want Zed. When 8 out of 11 are not playing because of high prices, it's because of high prices. And comparing sales of chocolate, which is endorphins, doesn't help to prove anything. If I could offer crack cocaine in a GW shop it would sell more then the miniatures too.

Griefbringer
22-04-2009, 19:33
IRather then accepting themselves as a nitch market and trying to suck max profit out of the few remaining hard cores they should be trying to get the populous into the hobby.

Haven't they been trying to push themselves for a bigger audience for the last 20 years or so?

Lewis
22-04-2009, 19:35
8 out of 11? Where are you getting that data from?

kaimarion
22-04-2009, 19:44
I will have to age with Fenlear here as their high prices do make them even more niche than they would be if the prices were lower, 2 of my friends stopped playing because of the prices and everyone at my LGC buy things rarely because of the prices.

Unite All Action
22-04-2009, 20:09
the bottom line in regards to their pricing is if it is too expensive do not buy it

Tagis
22-04-2009, 20:34
Got to agree with others here in that I know a lot of people who used to buy GWs models but now refuse to on the grounds of price. They can afford GWs prices but feel they are not getting value for money so no longer buy anything from them.

IJW
22-04-2009, 20:39
In my playing circle we have 3 people playing with 8 moping around because they can’t afford it.
Sounds just like my gaming group. Unfortunately, that's my gaming group from 1987 when metal Space Marines were 3 for £2.50, and half the gamers I knew were complaining about how expensive Marines were. :rolleyes:

It may sound like I'm just making fun of you, but the reality is that ALL gaming circles will have people complaining about prices instead of playing.


Haven't they been trying to push themselves for a bigger audience for the last 20 years or so?
Since about 1990 when the accountants told them 'expand or die', so getting on for 20 years, yes.

Again, I don't like the price rises, and I don't buy new GW figures, but at least come up with some valid points - things like complaining about corporate salaries when GW pay substantially less than the rest of the market (yes, that applies to management as well as shop staff) is just lazy - you can look up these things for free on the investors site.

Fenlear
22-04-2009, 20:47
And just like in 1987 GW would have been much better off getting half price out of the 11 of you rather then double out of 3 of you.

Tazok
22-04-2009, 20:56
It doesn't just drive people away, it also alters what the remaining customers purchase. I play strictly 40K. I refuse to expand into fantasy, LOTR, etc. because of the price increases in recent years. I can afford the prices, but like others have said I have a hard time justifying the value at the current price points.

Griefbringer
22-04-2009, 21:22
their high prices do make them even more niche than they would be if the prices were lower

Ironically, there are a lot of miniature manufacturers that are significantly cheaper than GW. Most of these are also totally niche compared to GW.

Reinholt
22-04-2009, 22:22
GW's problems:

- Fixed costs too high
- Too much inefficient management (I refer here to corporate level management, not retail store managers, whenever I refer to "management")
- Poor quality control and design discipline
- Poor inventory management

Solutions:

- Fire most of your current management and bring in better managers
or
- Hire some operational consultants to help you decide who to cut, where to optimize, and where to adjust your internal processes if you believe current top management can do the job, loathe as I am to recommend consultants to anyone

zedeyejoe
22-04-2009, 22:39
You can not think so all you want Zed. When 8 out of 11 are not playing because of high prices, it's because of high prices.

I think you missed my point. I was replying to the idea that lots more people (Joe Public) would be playing if the prices were lower. IMHO the price of figures could be zero and most people would not be interested in 'playing with toy soldiers'. Comparing the interest in a product like chocolate (almost universal appeal) with toy soldiers, would indeed be an interesting experiment. Of course you would probably attract the interest of the police as in these days you would be suspected of trying to poison people. So perhaps it would have to be a virtual experiment where you only asked people which they preferred, chocolate or toy soldiers, then you could estimate the interest in playing with toy soldiers (I have seen estimates of 2-3 people per 50,000 of the population).

Certainly GW behave as if they are operating in a market of inelastic demand (people will buy regardless of price).

andyg2006
22-04-2009, 23:03
I just bought 1 box of 20 Catachans for £18...as opposed to 2 boxes of 10 of the same miniatures (absolutely no difference, no extra sprues of different guns, whatsoever) for £24.
Now, the raw costs to produce the plastic have not gone up 1/3 in the last couple of months, and they are the exact same miniatures which have been around for ages, so they are not using the new advanced modelling techniques that we've been told about.
So why the price hike for the same darn thing?

kairous
22-04-2009, 23:33
So why the price hike for the same darn thing?

The sad thing is, you just answered your own question dude, there is no reason, just the fact that GW think the majority of us are so blind we will buy their stuff no matter the cost.:(

venus_redscar
23-04-2009, 01:50
I just want to clear one thing up. I wasn't complaining about high corporate salaries. I was complaining about too many high corporate salaries. I was referring to how a hierarchy gets bloated with too many VPs, too many directors, too many managers. All doing jobs that could be consolidated.

And then you get to consultants. Somebody told GW that there web site needed "Maximize sales" by removing free content and pushing just a webstore. How much do you think that paid for that advice? And then how much to make the new webpage...

Reinholt
23-04-2009, 05:24
How dare you post a reasonable clarification of your statement and accurate details? How dare you, sir?

Do you not know where you are? This is the Warseer Other GW Discussion forum! That kind of thing simply is not done here!

zedeyejoe
23-04-2009, 07:18
Somebody told GW that there web site needed "Maximize sales" by removing free content and pushing just a webstore. How much do you think that paid for that advice? And then how much to make the new webpage...

Well if you are in management, change is good. It shows that you are doing something. I have been involved in more than one project where the staff have told me that the the current project is changing things back to the way they used to be.

On the other hand on my own site I am looking to increase the amount of 'non selling' content, as I feel there should be a reason that people visit other than just shopping. But I do see that GW disagree with that point of view.

BLZBOB
23-04-2009, 10:37
In simplistic terms the business has two ways of making money from its products through sales. They can either sell a large volume at a low cost and gain a reduced profit per item but keep the same overall income. Or they can raise the price of the item and aim to have that cover shrinkage of customer base and sales.

The first option is generally employed by many companies that are expecting to sell very high volumes and have competition. This is why prices on many items can in fact go down over time even though production costs may have stayed the same or in fact risen.

The second option is far safer for a business that sells a limited amount and cannot guarantee that a lower price point would double the sales figures. Sadly although I would embrace lower cost at the till its unlikely to happen and I understand the reasonings behind it even though they are typically cloaked in corporatese.

There will come a point and perhaps not too far in the future where option B is no longer viable. Sales figures have already shown that prices rises lead to a shrinking customer base and the proliferation of armies being sold on again on the second hand market does hurt them, its a sale lost after all.

Reduction of production costs which is one way to save money will not necessarily be in GWs interest. Outsourcing production of hardware (note not books and paint) to China would very quickly bite them in the rear. Not necessarily due to quality although I will admit that in some cases quality of far east merchandise can be dubious. No the problem would come from the ripping off of moulds, in short within months factories would have copies of the GW tooling and it would start flooding the market at a lower price point than the originals.

This then harms genuine GW sales after all why pay 30GBP for those terminators if you can pick up some Shang Lueng Heavy Infantry Figures (Plastic 5) for ten or twelve pounds? The company putting out the 'based on' figures has no IP to pay for design costs are all someone else's and they can afford to go very low in their sales.

Sure lawyers would be brought to bear but how successful has that been in the past?

In closing then the only realistic way for them to save money is to either reduce stores which harm intake of newbies, reduce development costs which could see one or two codices/army books a year released and fewer new releases which would also harm sales. In point of fact most avenues open to them to reduce operating costs and lower prices would end up losing money as the increase in sales would not justify the reduced costings.

Perhaps instead of trying to cloak these price rises in bull they would be better off explaining why they have to increase in order to support existing and new product development and look towards other options to retain customers.

zedeyejoe
23-04-2009, 15:09
The first option is generally employed by many companies that are expecting to sell very high volumes and have competition. This is why prices on many items can in fact go down over time even though production costs may have stayed the same or in fact risen.

It also works best when you are buying the goods in. Then you can say to the supplier, look how much you are selling, I want a discount. Keep on doing that until the pips squeak, the supplier supplies you at not much more than cost (so they make little or no money) and you get to keep the difference as profit, whilst championing the cause of the consumer, low prices.

Works with food and clothing but not with GW models, cos they make the models themselves and the only suppliers they would be harming (had to think long and hard to find a polite word there) would be themselves.

akgaroth
23-04-2009, 15:16
the bottom line in regards to their pricing is if it is too expensive do not buy it

I agree with you. In fact, it should be GW to worry about how to keep their products accessible to a wide public while keeping their profits. I really like GW stuff but I can perfectly live without it.

But is really the management group of GW so bad?

rich1231
23-04-2009, 15:40
Ignoring the fact that I sell their product.

Prices up, volumes drop.

I cant imagine they are doing this without their cost base being further reduced somehow..

Templar Ben
23-04-2009, 15:41
In simplistic terms the business has two ways of making money from its products through sales. They can either sell a large volume at a low cost and gain a reduced profit per item but keep the same overall income. Or they can raise the price of the item and aim to have that cover shrinkage of customer base and sales.

The first option is generally employed by many companies that are expecting to sell very high volumes and have competition. This is why prices on many items can in fact go down over time even though production costs may have stayed the same or in fact risen.

The second option is far safer for a business that sells a limited amount and cannot guarantee that a lower price point would double the sales figures. Sadly although I would embrace lower cost at the till its unlikely to happen and I understand the reasonings behind it even though they are typically cloaked in corporatese.

The other point to remember is that GW is geared for larger volumes. PP is running into that wall now where it begins to make sense to switch from metal to plastic as metal is great for small runs but plastic is needed for high volume (high fixed cost with little variable cost).

GW is not the first company to act against themselves though.

pookie
23-04-2009, 16:44
I just bought 1 box of 20 Catachans for £18...as opposed to 2 boxes of 10 of the same miniatures (absolutely no difference, no extra sprues of different guns, whatsoever) for £24.
Now, the raw costs to produce the plastic have not gone up 1/3 in the last couple of months, and they are the exact same miniatures which have been around for ages, so they are not using the new advanced modelling techniques that we've been told about.
So why the price hike for the same darn thing?

no, what they have done is produce a cheaper box set with less modles in so that people will actually buy something, if you went in a wanted 20 Cadians for example youd buy the £18.00 box, not two £12.00 boxes, but if you only had £12.00 then you could at least walk walk away with something, where as before you wouldnt have and would have just walked away with your £12.00 in your pocket, not in there till.

zedeyejoe
23-04-2009, 18:14
But is really the management group of GW so bad?

Umm yes. Reasons, they ignore the world keep on their path regardless of the realities of the world. Possibly this combines with the first, take far too long to react and do something about problems. But perhaps they live in a fantasy world?

I mean it does not a great brain to be a 'manager' when everything is going well. Its when there are problems to solve and the team fails, that weaknesses are exposed.

Fenlear
23-04-2009, 19:37
Everyone who plays knows at least somebody they could get into the hobby if the prices were lower. Claiming they couldn't increase sales enough to justify lower prices is ridiculous.

On another note; what UK players pay is half way bearable. What it winds up costing in the US or Australia is ridiculous. They have some crazy conversion math going on. An extra 5% winds up being more like 10-15% when their done with it. If they are going to keep prices high and continuously increase them they could at least give us some fair conversion rates.

zedeyejoe
23-04-2009, 22:53
Claiming they couldn't increase sales enough to justify lower prices is ridiculous.

Well it works like this, you lower prices to get more sales and actually want make more profit because lots more people are buying (not from the goodness of your heart). When you actually get out and do the maths it becomes surprisingly difficult to actually do it. I don't notice Rolls Royce dropping their prices to encourage mass sales. So perhaps not ridiculous after all (unless you meant ridiculous in a sense I am not familiar with).

Templar Ben
23-04-2009, 23:38
Well here is some simple math to show the dropping price to increasing sales ratio.

Let's presume a store gets 1000 wigwams for selling 100 widgets.

If they drop the price from 10 wigwams to 8 wigwams (20% decrease in price) then to have the same revenue they need to sell 125 widgets (25% increase in volume).

For profit to remain the same they must be able to produce the increased number at a 20% decrease in per unit cost. There are economies of scale but there are variable costs that must be considered as well.

Reinholt
24-04-2009, 03:11
Well it works like this, you lower prices to get more sales and actually want make more profit because lots more people are buying (not from the goodness of your heart). When you actually get out and do the maths it becomes surprisingly difficult to actually do it. I don't notice Rolls Royce dropping their prices to encourage mass sales. So perhaps not ridiculous after all (unless you meant ridiculous in a sense I am not familiar with).

I don't notice Kia charging 200,000 pounds per car, either.

The fundamental underlying issue is what is referred to as the price elasticity of demand. In short:

Inelastic (or low elasticity) means that if you raise prices, you will gain more sales than you lose volume. In short, raising prices favors you, and lowering them hurts you.

Elastic (or high elasticity) means that if you raise prices, you will lose more volume than you gain sales. In short, raising prices hurts you, and lowering them helps you.

This ignores production costs, of course, but that is fine for now. Elasticity is not constant for all products, but, on average, discretionary goods tend to be more elastic and consumer staples tend to be less elastic.

So to determine if raising prices is good or bad, you have to have a handle on both production costs and demand elasticity for the general price neighborhood you are in.

Recently, when GW has raised prices, they have lost sales. Recently, GW's revenue has been down, on average, year over year for several years, and only stabilized with several large new product releases. GW games are a discretionary good, and we are in a globalized recession, which tends to have people reduce their purchases in general, starting with goods they view as highly discretionary.

Recently, GW has also been producing more plastics, which benefit from higher sales volumes.

To this end, I would say the following:

GW needs to lower prices, not raise them.

If costs are so high that lower prices are not feasible, GW needs to cut costs.

If GW also cannot cut costs, they should consider shutting down the company and returning money to their shareholders and debt-holders in an orderly unwind, as this means their business model is untenable.

My personal suspicion:

After analyzing GW's statements and financials, I would suspect they could both lower prices and cut costs to increase profitability, as there is significant inefficiency built into the company currently.

zedeyejoe
24-04-2009, 08:02
Inelastic (or low elasticity) means that if you raise prices, you will gain more sales than you lose volume. In short, raising prices favors you, and lowering them hurts you.

Yes that is the GW model. I don't think their market is as inelastic as they think it is but it is certainly the right sort of model for their business.

A group of fanatical customers and a product that has little general appeal (as I pointed out earlier). Whilst we would all like to buy GW stuff cheaper, the fact that we keep on spending shows that they have a point.

But I do agree that GW is inefficient but thats another side effect of a high margin company, "we can do what we want, if we get short of money, we raise prices".

BLZBOB
24-04-2009, 09:04
Thinking about it last night I came to the staggering conclusion that they have indeed lowered prices, but for new gamers. You see its only us vets that see these new boxes (IG squads I'm looking at you) as a slap in the face. Where we see a reasonable price increment through having to buy two new small boxes at a combined price point above that of the previous box with double content Johnny Come-Lately sees a box of ten men for only £x

He doesn't care that if he had been interested last week he could have gotten better deals if he had wanted more troops last week. He's not burdened with any of this knowledge all he can see is a troop box thats within his price point.

Likewise with battleforces rises imminent changes have been made to the content that makes them better than before these costs are not to be absorbed but passed on raising the cost. Now whilst I still think breaching the 50GBP limit is a dangerous psychological barrier Johnny Come-Lately just sees a bigger box that lets me save x% ver buying them individually.

Its the harmonisation with other ranger and raising prices of other ranges to recoup design costs on new releases that may be a bitter blow. But still its only vets that see these and as we know vets don't matter we tend to fall into two categories. Those that have everything they need and thus rarely buy anyway so why worry about pricing them out. And those that buy the shiny new toys anyway so why worry as they will buy it regardless.

There are many things that GW as a company could do to appease veterans that are not that onerous. Bulk discounts from the webstore could offset raised prices much like apocalypse deals enticed vets to pick up ten russes in one hit. Hell mail in barcodes for goodies anything from a limited run figure to factory tours not costly and generates good will amongst a key demographic. For a company that relies on word of mouth to sell itself irritating those that tell is never a good idea.

blongbling
24-04-2009, 10:45
its interesting to read the "GW mgt is a coporate money sink" on here. GW has a very flat Mgt structure without a very high cost attached to it. Let me break it down for you, the group has the CEO and CFO in it, these salaries are shown in the group reports. Reporting into these are the sales companies and then manufacturing/central finance functions.

These companines have a thin layer of managers in them, the sales companies will have a 3 or 4 man senior mgt team running them with the larget companies like UK and US having a another operational mgt layer beneath that to make things manageable due to the size of the turnover. The manufacturing and operations departments has a larger mgt team as this is generally made up of specialists, like accountants, and because of its international locations. Again this structure is very flat as it is across all of GW.

GW doesnt really have "dead wood" sitting around in its mgt teams as they are taken out quite effectively at the senior level by Mark Wells as and when nessecary. The pay that GW gives to its staff is widely accepted to be below what you would receive for the same role elsewhere, this is still true of senior managers within the buisness and means that the mgt costs for the company are relatively low and unbonused.

GW's operating costs come mainly from two distinct areas, its chain of retail stores and its staff wages. Now you could in theory close stores, reduce overheads and a million other things, however the reality is it jsut isnt that simple. Closing a store invariabley means making the staff redundant (more money) and buying out of your lease (more money) and losing the shop fit value on that location if it hasnt depreciated already.

Now GW did this already a few years ago and closed its loss making stores and relocated its head offices in France, Italy, Spain and Germany to cheaper locations at it cost millions of pounds. Having been at GW during this period i would be hard pressed to find more places to cut costs without it affecting either the quality of the products or affecting staff morale so badly that sales suffer.

there was also some talk about GW ploughing on ahead regardless of what is said on the forums about what they are doing good or bad or whatever people consider the prices too high or not. Part of having a business strategy menas that you dont chop and change your mind every five minutes, part of having that strategy is that, to some point, you have to see it through. I am not saying that it cannot change but you need to move in a direction for a long enough time so that you can see what is happening. Part of that process also involves the review of what is happening, GW always reviews what they are doing, done and the effect it has had; no decisions are entered into blindly of the consequences despite what people outside the company think.

As a PLc GW is trying to make as much money as possible for its shareholders, if they are therefore trying to increase their margins in order to facilitate that then more power to them, i want a dividend and increased share price. Having recently left i can tell you that the company is in a good position, staff are good, the company is lean and they are working their assess off to make things right and get the company back into solid year on year growth. The decisions they make may not please everyone but your perogative as a consumer is to vote with your feet.

spaint2k
24-04-2009, 11:19
As a PLc GW is trying to make as much money as possible for its shareholders, if they are therefore trying to increase their margins in order to facilitate that then more power to them, i want a dividend and increased share price. Having recently left i can tell you that the company is in a good position, staff are good, the company is lean and they are working their assess off to make things right and get the company back into solid year on year growth. The decisions they make may not please everyone but your perogative as a consumer is to vote with your feet.

And this is precisely why the PLC is a scourge on this Earth. Grow grow GROW! Your company is a failure unless it's always GROWING!!! Damn the employees, damn the customer, and damn the environment, as long as the shareholders are being kept happy.

Hell, you don't even have to generate real, tangible results with your decisions as long as the shareholders THINK that you're doing something that will ultimately increase their profit.

Once your company has gone on the market you become a slave to the shareholders: parasitic entities who contribute next to nothing to the business beyond their initial cash injection.

Steve

Griefbringer
24-04-2009, 12:49
Now that last post is probably getting too close to the P&R department...

I can just state that anybody with a little bit of cash has the freedom to become a shareholder of GW or any other PLC. This entitles one to speak up, make proposals and vote on the annual general meeting, and should he or she find up enough other like-minded shareholders there is a possibility of actually affecting the corporate policy as a shareholder.

dancingmonkey
24-04-2009, 14:10
And this is precisely why the PLC is a scourge on this Earth. Grow grow GROW! Your company is a failure unless it's always GROWING!!! Damn the employees, damn the customer, and damn the environment, as long as the shareholders are being kept happy.

Hell, you don't even have to generate real, tangible results with your decisions as long as the shareholders THINK that you're doing something that will ultimately increase their profit.

Once your company has gone on the market you become a slave to the shareholders: parasitic entities who contribute next to nothing to the business beyond their initial cash injection.

Steve

I agree (perhaps minus the harsh words :)).
Once PP float on the market I'm going to be looking for another new game.
I for one see it as inevitable as they attempt to grow to match GW.

Companies need to make money to survive sure, but stakeholders seem little but trouble to my ill educated eye.

spaint2k
24-04-2009, 14:43
Now that last post is probably getting too close to the P&R department...

I can just state that anybody with a little bit of cash has the freedom to become a shareholder of GW or any other PLC. This entitles one to speak up, make proposals and vote on the annual general meeting, and should he or she find up enough other like-minded shareholders there is a possibility of actually affecting the corporate policy as a shareholder.

Not sure what P&R means, but you've missed the point.

Yes, yes, IF I (as a prospective shareholder) can find enough like-minded shareholders, together (assuming our piddling stake in the company is big enough) can somehow "affect" corporate policy. Wouldn't that make the company a slave to the shareholders like I said above?

Anyway, excuse me while I make some kind of raspberry sound with my lips.

Will these changes to corporate policy alter the FUNDAMENTAL policy of generating profit for the shareholders?

Of course not, which was the entire thrust of my point.

A privately-owned company is usually run by someone who has a vested, personal interest in making the company succeed. It's often run by someone who has invested heart, soul and time into the endeavour. It's often run by someone who might actually care about his employees because he realizes that his company depends on them. It's run by someone who might have long-term customer relationships based on a quality product whose reputation he values because the product's reputation is his own reputation.

A PLC is NOT. A PLC is run by someone who even if he manages to run the company into the ground is still entitled to a lovely golden parachute. It's run by someone who might understand business a lot better than the former owner, but he's also someone who doesn't give a rat's ass about his employees or whether he is actually providing a quality product to a customer. Primarily however, it's run by someone who's job description can be summarized as "increase profit for the shareholders".

Steve

blongbling
24-04-2009, 14:49
and all of the previosu statement doesnt apply to the way workshop works....Gw cares a lot about its staff and has a very high staff retention, you only have to look at the over subscribed ten year veterans do to see how long people stay with GW.

You also misunderstand that most of the senior execs within GW also are toy soldier fanatics too so they have a vested interest in making sure that things are done for the right reasons and arent chasing money for moneys sake.

spaint2k
24-04-2009, 15:17
and all of the previosu statement doesnt apply to the way workshop works....


I find your rebuttal doubtful.



Gw cares a lot about its staff and has a very high staff retention, you only have to look at the over subscribed ten year veterans do to see how long people stay with GW.


I don't believe, for one second, that GW wouldn't consider cutting off heads, eliminating entire departments ("to focus on our 'core competencies' blablabla") and flat out firing people if it meant "cost-cutting" and "profit-generation".

GW is not going to consider a staff member's loyalty if it needs to cut costs quickly to improve shareholder perception.



You also misunderstand that most of the senior execs within GW also are toy soldier fanatics too so they have a vested interest in making sure that things are done for the right reasons and arent chasing money for moneys sake.

Pretty sure Mark Wells isn't a toy soldier fanatic.

What about Tom Kirby? Does he have an army?

Do these two people have a golden parachute? By which I mean, even if they are voted OUT of the company for total incompetence, they are still entitled to an obscene sum of money.

Steve

IJW
24-04-2009, 15:59
A privately-owned company is usually run by someone who has a vested, personal interest in making the company succeed. It's often run by someone who has invested heart, soul and time into the endeavour.
[...]
A PLC is NOT. A PLC is run by someone who even if he manages to run the company into the ground is still entitled to a lovely golden parachute. It's run by someone who might understand business a lot better than the former owner, but he's also someone who doesn't give a rat's ass about his employees or whether he is actually providing a quality product to a customer.


What about Tom Kirby? Does he have an army?
I've no idea if he has an army, but it's worth bearing in mind that he's one of the longest serving people at GW, from before he was part of the original internal management buyout from Bryan Ansell in 1991.

P.S. I've personal experience of privately-run businesses that were happy to cut off heads, eliminate entire departments and flat out fire people - that's got nothing to do with a company being a PLC. :(

Reinholt
24-04-2009, 16:25
You also misunderstand that most of the senior execs within GW also are toy soldier fanatics too so they have a vested interest in making sure that things are done for the right reasons and arent chasing money for moneys sake.

This, fundamentally, is the problem.

I believe it is precisely the fact that the inmates are running the asylum that leads to GW doing poorly. What they lack is business knowledge; there is nothing evil about running a company to make a profit.

Why?

Because the best way to make a profit is usually one of two things:

- Produce cheaper than everyone else, and sell a high volume, so that your customers can get things for less money than they otherwise would

- Produce high quality items that are superior to what other companies are producing in some way, and charge your equilibrium price for them, so that people are getting good value for the money and you can grow your long-term customer base.

Neither of those are bad things! I would suggest short-termism, pursuing money today by throwing away money tomorrow through burning bridges with customers, cutting costs that should not have been cut (such as layoffs to make target numbers for a single quarter when you are laying off essential staff), and so on, are all dumb business strategies.

They eventually catch up with companies. Maybe not immediately, but you cannot do that kind of thing forever. I have never claimed GW doesn't care; I will, however, claim that their management tends not to also be good businessmen in the proper sense of the word.

I will not even get into their staggering failures with regard to corporate governance.


GW's operating costs come mainly from two distinct areas, its chain of retail stores and its staff wages.

Let me make something clear:

If GW cannot cut their costs beyond their current amounts, they should shut down the company. In the United States their workers make what is, essentially, minimum wage in the retail division for the most part (or above it by a trivial amount). Their retail locations are not top-tier, high-price locations.

Thus, if you are telling me their management is very flat (it is not, and it is also not configured correctly; if you want flat management, I know of a company where any individual employee is only three steps from the CEO, which is not true of GW by quite a margin), and they have no room to cut development costs by improving quality control, no room to make production cheaper, and no room to generate increased marketing efficiency, my answer would be to either scale back or unwind the company and start returning money to shareholders.

With that said, GW has costs they can cut, and some of them are in management. I won't name names here to insult people, but I can tick off at least three or four people (and I have met these people, they are not names in the wind) who deserve a salary of 0 based on their value added to the company.


The decisions they make may not please everyone but your perogative as a consumer is to vote with your feet.

People have been doing that! This is precisely the problem. At no point is cutting your customer base without increasing revenue (which is what happened to GW) a good thing. Their pricing strategy is, to be blunt, stupid. I'm not going to sugar coat that. They are running their business poorly.

Telling your customer to "Get lost if you don't like it" is, on average, a good way to bankrupt your business. Guess what? They might just get lost, and then who's going to pay your bills?


Bottom line: GW is not a well run company. Berkshire Hathaway (and most of their subsidiaries, as well) is an example of a well run company. GW is nowhere near that standard.

t-tauri
24-04-2009, 16:25
Tom Kirby is a gamer going back a very long way.

If we start heading into political debate of the merits of PLCs and private companies this thread will be in P&R in short order. Let's keep on GW please.

Tagis
24-04-2009, 17:01
The new Empire model pricing has made this thread moot. GW have obviously decided to ask "How may we increase our profit?" instead. Time will tell whether they asked the right question.

yabbadabba
24-04-2009, 18:56
An interesting thread. First, no point comparing GW to other toy soldier companies. There is no comparison. Secondly, there is a point in any business where you need to stop cutting costs and focus on increasing sales. With GW being vertically integrated, their main push now must be to increase sales. Part of Tesco's recent success has been to buy it's way into increased profit by opening more stores, and converting more superstores to extras (bigger stores). While increasing costs, they have also increased sales and profits.. While GW's costs would go up, opening more stores would definitely increase sales if they opened in the right places. But, like everything GW does now, it is a gamble.

GW have targetted the one thing that they can affect directly - price points. Yes, it will be more for less, welcome to the real world. But the price points are coming down, making consistent sales more easy. This supports GW's traditional push of recruit, recruit, recruit.

Lets clarify one thing - apart for very small, minor corrections, GW cannot, and will not decrease prices with their current structure and business outlook. The best chance customers have of any kind of price reduction programme is for GW to stop being a Plc. Then the push for profit for profits sake can be abandoned.

Templar Ben
24-04-2009, 21:34
So is no one happy with my Wigwam and Widget company? :(

Reinholt
25-04-2009, 03:42
Secondly, there is a point in any business where you need to stop cutting costs and focus on increasing sales.

Why would you ever focus only on one and not the other? Especially when decreasing costs, increasing quality, and increasing sales as a result are all often the product of the same actions?

Toyota would be a great example of a company that cuts costs to increase sales; they cut costs by making their design and production process more efficient and more reliable. This increases the quality of their product. This increases sales.

All of this happens with them paying less money. Quality is free, in many cases. It often saves you money. Lack of discipline and lack of knowledge are the primary obstacle.


With GW being vertically integrated, their main push now must be to increase sales. Part of Tesco's recent success has been to buy it's way into increased profit by opening more stores, and converting more superstores to extras (bigger stores). While increasing costs, they have also increased sales and profits.. While GW's costs would go up, opening more stores would definitely increase sales if they opened in the right places. But, like everything GW does now, it is a gamble.

I disagree entirely; while GW is vertically integrated, they still have significant inefficiency in their operations. They should focus on wringing that out to lower costs and increase quality (both for the models and for the games, as good games sell more models and bad games sell less models) first.

Increasing your fixed costs (which is what expansion will do) in a recession, or when you are not generating enough cash to begin with, is a bad idea. GW needs to clean up their house, streamline operations, then expand. You do not expand first.


Then the push for profit for profits sake can be abandoned.

What does that even mean?

GW didn't turn a profit at all for a while there; they certainly aren't pushing for losses for losses sake, whatever that means.

A well-run company with satisfied customers, strong operations, and financial discipline will almost always turn a solid profit. I don't understand why making money in a business is bad; do you want GW to be run as a non-profit or a charity? Those are often the most inefficient and abysmal organizations around!

GW's problem, in my view, is that they aren't doing enough to make a profit, and that starts with lowering costs, improving quality, and making their customers happier as a result. Would you object to better games, cheaper models, more transparency, and more consistency from GW?

wilsonian
25-04-2009, 04:54
I've worked for several computer companies in the past, two companies spring to mind which I shall not mention their names. One is dead in the ground - this is known as Company Z, the other is advertised on buses, mag's the works - these shall be known as Company A.

Now Company Z had a 30% on ALL products. Sure we were very well priced compared to high street chains like dixons etc but compared to online stores we couldn't keep up. The company reliyed on punters through the door buying maybe the odd compauter part but it's major sales were bugger all and in the end they couldn't keep up and ended up closing down. Why? Well because they had a larger over head for were the store was based then on top of that the average customers walking past were clothe shopping now directly coming to buy PC parts. Now Company A is still going strong and operates on very small tiny mark up. if it's a popular product then they don't even make a profit (reliying on postage to cover the costs). It's all down to product pricing and the general state of the market.

Sounds simple enough when in that type of business you and every other company out there are selling the same thing while GW have a market for them selves - or so they think. GW need to remove them selves from just pumping out crap and listen to their customers before it's too late and their gear ends on eBay and warmachine gets another player. :(

zedeyejoe
25-04-2009, 07:27
OK my story.

When I was setting up my business there were some government run courses to give us a bit of help. One guy was looking to set up a shop selling nightclub clothes for women. His USP (unique selling point) was a tiered level of discounts, buy more the stuff gets cheaper so the guy running the course starts asking him what his discount is for larger and larger purchases. The punchline is "at what point do you start giving it away free?".

Selling on price is a strategy but its not the only strategy in business.

wilsonian
25-04-2009, 07:32
Don't get me wrong it does have its draw backs but when has GW ever had an OOP sale? last I remember was back in 2000 when they closed aload of euro stores.

I liked the 3 tank squadron boxsets as it made the Leman russ that little bit cheaper - why did they have to make them a limited offer? Surely they would have moved more boxes since the release of 5th ed.

I remember when you could buy 3 tanks and get the 3rd half price. where are offers like that? it's all about getting the kid in store now and nothing much for the vet :(

phoenixlaw
25-04-2009, 07:50
Do you think franchising could work for them ?

It would seem to be the answer to cutting store costs, and also you'd have someone with money invested looking after the store and making sure it runs well.

zedeyejoe
25-04-2009, 08:50
Yes In think the franchise idea is worth running with. Problem in the UK is that I just don't think that a wargames shop is viable. I had the chance to buy a shop last year and decided not to go ahead. I figured that I would need a turnover of £3000 a week just to break even.

genestealer_baldric
27-04-2009, 09:08
i sort of expected a price decrease becuase my mate worked in the design cad deptartment a few months back and he and 5 other got layed off. Apperntley they have new equipement that made them oboslute and so i expected a more streamlined and efficent reducing costs, but non was forthcomming.

The problem with lower grade matireals it will reduce the quality and thats what Gw prides it self on. Instead of there factory layout at the moment which is not the most efficent they could move to a more purpose built factory. That the other side of the problem is that the models are made in the uk and so will cost alot more than if they were built abroad then shipped from there.

The Phazer
27-04-2009, 16:00
Part of that process also involves the review of what is happening, GW always reviews what they are doing, done and the effect it has had; no decisions are entered into blindly of the consequences despite what people outside the company think.

No offense, but you thought building an e-commerce site that didn't work with 70% of the browser market was a good idea. I'm not sure I trust your judgement here.

Phazer

blongbling
27-04-2009, 18:19
Pretty sure Mark Wells isn't a toy soldier fanatic.

Steve

wrong, Mark is a gamer, paints on his desk, and plays as well. Dont assume things you dont know

blongbling
27-04-2009, 18:28
No offense, but you thought building an e-commerce site that didn't work with 70% of the browser market was a good idea. I'm not sure I trust your judgement here.
Phazer

i didnt say i like the site, to be honest i feel it is very clunky and doesnt do a good job at all. what i was saying is that there is a review of things they do, they dont jsut role dice and decide on things that way.



The problem with lower grade matireals it will reduce the quality and thats what Gw prides it self on. Instead of there factory layout at the moment which is not the most efficent they could move to a more purpose built factory. That the other side of the problem is that the models are made in the uk and so will cost alot more than if they were built abroad then shipped from there.

i would be interested to see when you last went round the site and reviewed the way it looked in your professional capactity or is this based on assumptions? Although in theory having models made in a foreign country could reduce the costs of the products with the incresing costs of transport and incresing costs of wages abroad this wouldnt be a long term solution.



Don't get me wrong it does have its draw backs but when has GW ever had an OOP sale? last I remember was back in 2000 when they closed aload of euro stores.


why would they, anything that is OOP can jsut be melted down and used to make new models, same with the plastics, they can be ground down and reused......

The Phazer
27-04-2009, 22:39
i didnt say i like the site, to be honest i feel it is very clunky and doesnt do a good job at all. what i was saying is that there is a review of things they do, they dont jsut role dice and decide on things that way.

I suggest anyone who wishes to judge if you have previously stated the site was fine or not clicks on either of our user names and reads the previous thread on it.

Phazer

yabbadabba
28-04-2009, 04:58
Sorry, but that is...frankly a deliberate untruth, as anyone who wishes to go and look through the thread on the website relaunch can testify too.

Phazer

And you have proof of that? Being from the inner sanctums of GW? You might disagree, but accusations of lying need to be backed up by hard evidence, not emotionally driven circumstantial stuff.

spaint2k
28-04-2009, 06:12
wrong, Mark is a gamer, paints on his desk, and plays as well. Dont assume things you dont know

Wish I could paint at my desk. I'd probably get fired for it though. Did he use to paint at his desk when he worked for Boots as well?

Steve

genestealer_baldric
28-04-2009, 08:40
i would be interested to see when you last went round the site and reviewed the way it looked in your professional capactity or is this based on assumptions? Although in theory having models made in a foreign country could reduce the costs of the products with the incresing costs of transport and incresing costs of wages abroad this wouldnt be a long term solution.

it IS cheaper to get thing made abroad but the thing with using forgein cheap labour it raises moral issues and i dont think that Gw would not think it the ethical choice, which i agree with.

GW is quite rightly proud of its orgins i reckon they will allways be based in notts, but if the people who are turned it away from a hobby company to the current business try to change manufacture system it i dunno what they will do. Especialy in the current climate of saving money when possible..

It was a semi-professional view granted i didnt see the whole area of Gw but i do help design factorys and production lines but it wasnt a indepth analysis i was more intrested in what they were working on ;).

Wintermute
28-04-2009, 11:15
Accusations of lying are not allowed on WarSeer at all.

Wintermute

genestealer_baldric
28-04-2009, 11:26
huh what? i wasnt accusating anyone ?

bomblu
28-04-2009, 11:31
IMP: didnt have time to read this thread so i'm just going to post my idea. If i stumble across it once i'm reading the entire thing then i'll edit and remove.

I was thinking of this. To reduce prices (mainly on materials) GW can place 'recycle bins' for plastic sprues and extra plastic bits which we dont need. Through this they'll be getting a percentage of the material back which can be reused rather than thrown away ect.

genestealer_baldric
28-04-2009, 11:34
oh thats a very good idea to have in stores and maybe people could bring in old bits from home and get some loyalty bonus for it, nice one sir

forthegloryofkazadekrund
28-04-2009, 11:36
IMP: didnt have time to read this thread so i'm just going to post my idea. If i stumble across it once i'm reading the entire thing then i'll edit and remove.

I was thinking of this. To reduce prices (mainly on materials) GW can place 'recycle bins' for plastic sprues and extra plastic bits which we dont need. Through this they'll be getting a percentage of the material back which can be reused rather than thrown away ect.

Didnt they so no to that great idea a few years ago due to things like transportation costs ect?

bomblu
28-04-2009, 13:36
oh thats a very good idea to have in stores and maybe people could bring in old bits from home and get some loyalty bonus for it, nice one sir

Thanks :)


Didnt they so no to that great idea a few years ago due to things like transportation costs ect?

True...transport costs. Though plastic's light and quite easy to transport plus, they dont need to arrive in one piece as they'll be molten down into new sculpts. Now, plastic can be reused so i dont see why investing in a once per season postage thing. I for one use some of the sprues so they wont be getting everything back and neither will they have containers full of plastic sprues. You also have to assume that about 30% of the ppl wont even bother giving back the sprues, some who might keep them for later use etc. If i were up on top i'd think about it.

It's a suggestion so any GW guy who reads this and likes it, by all means do it. Who knows...they might get some commison for government for using recycled material. Even for the boxes ect.

spaint2k
28-04-2009, 13:43
The recycling scheme isn't worth it at all.

The stuff has to be ground up and can only form a certain percentage of new product before seriously affecting quality.

Most importantly, plastic costs next to nothing. The cost of shipping all those sprues back to head office is more than they're worth.

Steve

blongbling
28-04-2009, 20:59
I suggest anyone who wishes to judge if you have previously stated the site was fine or not clicks on either of our user names and reads the previous thread on it.

Phazer

i would like to point out that having been working for GW when the site was launched i would have said how great it was, now that i no longer do i can say what i think :D

Templar Ben
28-04-2009, 21:24
We have discussed sprue recycling quite a bit.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128634

On page one I link to how the US Navy melts plastic into discs for storage and transport.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136967

Here is one on a more generic concept.

http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90251

We really did talk about that a lot didn't we?

bomblu
29-04-2009, 08:39
We really did talk about that a lot didn't we?

Yep very true...never saw those threads :p

zedeyejoe
01-05-2009, 16:20
i would like to point out that having been working for GW when the site was launched i would have said how great it was, now that i no longer do i can say what i think

IMHO it is never worth saying things that you don't really agree with (silence is the rule there) no matter how much you are paid to say them. A reputation is a hard thing to regain.

Lord Humongous
02-05-2009, 06:59
Seriously, what else does GW have that cheaper companies don't besides a bulky, worthless corporate structure?

-Lots of retail overhead
-Public stockholders to pay dividends to
-Liscensing expenses (LoTR)
-Structured debt (I'm assuming, hard to compare vs non public companies with private records)
-A much larger product line
-A proven history of profitability

zedeyejoe
02-05-2009, 21:25
Of course some of those things don't happen now :)