PDA

View Full Version : Solution to 'Problem' of GW



Sonny Liston
11-05-2009, 10:48
Well after reading many of the threads here of how GW has declined, how WD isn't the same etc. etc. I have come to a conclusion. It seems to me that the majority of these people complaining are 'vets' who are just disillusioned because the games are not marketed at them. From the critiscism of stores, to GD to WD it it mostly stems down to something about the kids in some shape or form. GW will try to cater to the demographic that offers them the most money which is kids who will play for roughly a year. Why should they cater to a small number of their demographic?

Fenrir
11-05-2009, 11:00
Are you sure that everything in that statement is true?

Sonny Liston
11-05-2009, 11:09
Well obviously not everything but I was sort of in a rush. But a lot of replies eeem to imply that GW needs to change to suit the needs of vets etc. because it owes them something. I don't think it does, its just a business to make money at the end of the day. I'm still in a rush but I'll explain later when I have moe time...

VerifiablySane
11-05-2009, 11:21
I may agree with what you say, but surely it would have been better to start the topic when you are less rushed. A more considered presentation of your point right at the outset would be far more helpful than checking back later in hope.

Ultimate Life Form
11-05-2009, 11:35
I´m no vet to say the least, I have been in this for 2 years now, but I was well over 20 when I started and the first thing I noticed about GW was that it had an extremely weird company philosophy with next to no advertisment (hadn´t my friend told me I wouldn´t even know today a company by the name of GW exists), high prices, crappy rules, next to no support for their games and seemingly the ideal that it should be as hard as possible for the customer to get hold of the models he craves (if you want something specific or want older stuff, you´re basically screwed. I was only recently told that I would have no way whatsoever of influencing which head variant they would send me when I order a Razordon:().

So it´s not me being a disillusioned Scar Veteran, I can speak from an outside perspective and confirm most of this is rather weird and unfortunate and not really necessary.:(

Templar Ben
11-05-2009, 13:16
It is not that GW needs to cater to vets. GW needs to keep customers as that is going to result in more profit than constantly attempting to draw in more to replace those that are pushed out (not the ones that leave of their own accord). Yes GW should try to get new players but going after the most fickle market in hopes of getting money quickly is setting them up to fail. GW's methods are counter productive since so many that get out put their models on eBay or Bartertown. GW is selling product today that is going to reduce sales tomorrow.

GW could easily use SG to keep people playing but want to focus on churn and burn of 12 y/o. The years of neglect of the most loyal supporters has hurt GW. It seems to be worse now than in recent memories.

I know people like to point to the purchasing power of the tween market but many people fail to realize that while there is money there, it is spent by not the child but by the parent. That parent in the current environment can just as easily buy the child a Wii.

The Phazer
11-05-2009, 14:04
I don't think GW needs to cater to vets. I think GW needs to accept that creativity is the main part of the hobby and that feeding back and celebrating it's customers creativity (by facilitating it, like having a bitz service, or by showing it off, by having good content in WD) inspires gamers of all ages. It gives Vets stuff to do and satisfies them, and also gives newbie kids something to aspire to and something to be in awe of, just like I was when I first started, and was the thing that kept me painting through those first few years of really sucking at it.

It's not a vet/not vet issue. It's about growing the player base with a good, exciting product in a way that's good for everyone. And some of us (and GW's sales figures, bluntly) don't think that GW have been doing a great job of it in some areas.

Phazer

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 14:05
...GW could easily use SG to keep people playing...

Not enough players wanted to 'graduate' to playing the 'advanced' SG game systems when SG was fully promoted, they prefered to keep gaming with their 25/28/30mm models.

The other SG systems didn't require as many models and thus weren't financially interesting for GW to continue supporting.


The 'veteran suitable' solution in that case would be for GW to release 'advanced' rule sets for their 25/28/30mm game systems...

...but that would be difficult.

- Trying to concurrently support two game systems for the same set of models with limited studio staff would inevitably lead to one system getting the short shrift.

- It would cause customer confusion.

- Like with GW's current 'advanced' game systems (Epic, Warmaster & Battle of Five Armies), there probably aren't enough 'veterans' around that are actually interested in supporting the game, so it wouldn't be financially worth it.


'Advanced D&D' caused analogous problems for years until it was absorbed back into the main publication range.


So the "solution to the problem"?

For me, I continued to collect Warhammer 40,000 for the models and for 'beer and pretzel' gameplay, and moved over to Epic for a skill-appropriate gaming system, so I can pick and choose between game systems depending on my mood (brain turned 'on' or 'off' wouldn't be a terrible way to describe it); I just accepted that GW is (quite rightly!) more interested in catering to the needs of their core market.




Why should they cater to a small number of their demographic?

They shouldn't, at least not primarily so.

The ultimate truth is that GW's Core games are primarily intended for kids 11-14, and if GW re-focused primarily on the 'veterans' then they'd have some serious financial hurdles to clear, and would very possibly face losing the support of their core market.

Cane
11-05-2009, 14:13
GW's alienation of vets is never a good thing nor shoud it ever be encouraged. You don't alienate your loyal customers in a business...thats just an incompetent "strategy". Hiking the price during one of the worst economic periods in history not only alienates customers but is a huge slap in the face. Especially one as niche and community driven as the GW Hobby -- negative actions by GW are more than echoed by its players; negatively affecting their valued word-of-mouth marketing.

Catering mainly towards kids in the expensive and seemingly ineffective retail store chain is not a good way to increase your business as its barely sustained GW the past few years. The solution to GW's problem lies in hiring new upper tier management.

Templar Ben
11-05-2009, 14:23
AD&D actually was not the problem. TSR kept both lines going for years and it was TSR's failures as a whole that brought that to an end. The fact that WotC did not support Basic is no different than WotC not supporting DarkSun. It was just a sign of WotC focusing to ensure they make the most of their new investment.

The fact that SG are not available in indies, the fact that SG are actively kept out of gaming in GW branded stores, the fact that GW pretends that SG doesn't exist does keep the numbers down.

It is not uncommon for a company to maintain a line that is not as profitable just to keep those customers. The alternative is to have them leave and go to a competitor and take a lot of others with them.

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 14:29
It is not uncommon for a company to maintain a line that is not as profitable just to keep those customers. The alternative is to have them leave and go to a competitor and take a lot of others with them.
Well, GW have certainly decided not to actively support part of their customer base ('veterans').

It is however, only a small part of their customer base.

loveless
11-05-2009, 14:31
Heh...it does kinda make sense. Why do what the veterans want when they already have a full army? Why not do things that pull in people who have 0 miniatures? You'll definitely get more money out of them - after all, how many veterans completely redo an army when new models come out?

I wonder if the idea isn't "You have 4,000 points of Space Marines? Great! Now buy Orks. No, we don't want your input on making Space Marines better. Buy Orks. Listen, if we make Terminators better, are you going to go buy more? No? Then buy Orks. They're awesome. Trust us."

Side note: If there was a "solution" proposed in this thread, I missed it.

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 14:38
If there was a "solution" proposed in this thread, I missed it.

I proposed 'Warhammer 40,000 advance edition'... which would make some 'veterans' happy, but concurrently cause problems for the company. :)


Oh the other solution is ''veterans' should play the 'advanced' Specialist Games battle games', but that didn't work when GW tried it, so I doubt my proposal will have much weight. :D

Cane
11-05-2009, 14:48
I'm not sure that I buy into the whole "Vets don't buy a lot of GW stuff" argument. When new models like the Valkyrie are released, Vets preorder them and they're the ones who can already field an AirCav army despite it only being the second week of May. Especially when new Space Marine models are released - the Vets buy 'em up. Baneblades, Stompas, etc. - these all seem to cater towards the more experienced GW hobbyist both in skill level (including painting in addition to building) and their high price since kiddies are going to find it tough justifying a single $90 kit that is meant for Apoc.

While the numbers may not look as pretty as when a kiddie starts building up his force, the amount of stuff Vets purchase probably isn't a number to overlook or underestimate. However Vets are more prone to realizing when GW isn't in their best hobby interests thanks to GW's business plan.

Templar Ben
11-05-2009, 14:48
Well, GW have certainly decided not to actively support part of their customer base ('veterans').

It is however, only a small part of their customer base.

A small part that tends to purchase from Forge World (the most profitable line) doesn't require GW stores (which is the highest cost channel) and can strongly influence gaming groups.

I am not saying Vets are the most profitable segment as I have no research. The sad part is GW also doesn't have that research and have no idea where they should target their efforts.


Heh...it does kinda make sense. Why do what the veterans want when they already have a full army? Why not do things that pull in people who have 0 miniatures? You'll definitely get more money out of them - after all, how many veterans completely redo an army when new models come out?

I wonder if the idea isn't "You have 4,000 points of Space Marines? Great! Now buy Orks. No, we don't want your input on making Space Marines better. Buy Orks. Listen, if we make Terminators better, are you going to go buy more? No? Then buy Orks. They're awesome. Trust us."

Side note: If there was a "solution" proposed in this thread, I missed it.

Vets tend to buy Forgeworld. Vets pick up the large kits when worth it. Vets are a tremendous source of income.

I didn't say that GW shouldn't try to get new gamers. I just said that GW should be smart about getting new gamers.

You didn't see a solution because there wasn't a problem presented.

The question was why should GW cater to a small portion of the customer base.

The question is missing some information such as:

How large is that percentage of the number of customers?
What is the average spending per customer in that group and overall?
How is expensive it is to encourage those sales compared to gaining new customers?
How effective is that group at getting knock on sales by actively recruiting compared to other marketing efforts?

Why cater to any market? Profit.

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 15:02
A small part that tends to purchase from Forge World (the most profitable line) doesn't require GW stores (which is the highest cost channel) and can strongly influence gaming groups.
I don't deny it.

Tournament gamers for example, form a tiny tiny tiny percentage of GW gamers, yet have a really loud voice.


I am not saying Vets are the most profitable segment as I have no research. The sad part is GW also doesn't have that research and have no idea where they should target their efforts.
GW does have that research.



The question was why should GW cater to a small portion of the customer base.
My answer was that they shouldn't.



How large is that percentage of the number of customers?
Small in comparison to the 'noobie' crowd.


What is the average spending per customer in that group and overall?
Per month, probably less than a typical noobie starting up the game (Entry cost to play GW games is on the order of ~£100... only exceptionally dedicated 'veterans' can keep up that kind of spending on GW products).

'Noobies' also outnumber 'veterans' by an order of magnitude.


How effective is that group at getting knock on sales by actively recruiting compared to other marketing efforts?

As long as they game regularly in a GW store and have painted their miniatures, that group is quite effective at passive promotion as they provide a visually impresive demonstration of the game in progress to passing trade.

As regards active recruitment (as in actively finding non-players and introducing them to the game), I'd say that they're pretty ineffective. They only tend to 'recruit' people who already play wargames in some form or another ('gamers'), while GW stores recruit 'noobs' who have never come across wargaming before.

Ie: GW's recruiting tends to recruit new customers, 'veteran' recruiting just tends to move existing customers from one product line to another.

Osbad
11-05-2009, 15:10
GW does have that research.

I don't deny they have *some* research.

My view is that their research is probably worthless at best and misleading at worst.

They have no way, for instance of working out the demographic of their sales via independent stores.

The only data they have reliable information is by sample of their own B&M stores, and sales via their own webstore (which will split between those that have their own credit card and are therefore >18 and those that do not.)

There is no way that such a skewed data population can tell them anything meaningful about their customers. Simple fact.

GW may tell its staff that they have that information. The reality is that they cannot have that information in any reliable way. They wouldn't be the first company in history to mislead their sales force...


'veteran' recruiting just tends to move existing customers from one product line to another.

Or stops them quitting buying from GW altogether. A sale is a sale is sale. It matters not the age or experience of the person generating it.

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 15:14
...Baneblades, Stompas, etc. - these all seem to cater towards the more experienced GW hobbyist both in skill level (including painting in addition to building) and their high price since kiddies are going to find it tough justifying a single $90 kit that is meant for Apoc.

Those kits cater to a certain kind of 'veteran', certainly, but many 'veterans' are turned off by the lack of tactical complexity in Apocalypse, and the evident stretching of the Warhammer 40,000 turn sequence in larger battles.


'Veteran' doesn't refer to one homogenous group all with the same beliefs, after all.

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 15:16
Or stops them quitting buying from GW altogether.

Indeed that's true.

One of the advantages GW has as a near-monopoly is that 'quitting' GW is hard because historically there has been a dearth of competition.

Ozorik
11-05-2009, 15:16
[/QUOTE]
GW does have that research.


I'd be interested in seeing that research, especially just how it was conducted and what factors it covered.


My answer was that they shouldn't.


Why not? Take SGs for example.


Not enough players wanted to 'graduate' to playing the 'advanced' SG game systems when SG was fully promoted

I'm not entirely sure that this is accurate. I for one have every SG that GW has released in the last 15 years, nearly every other gamer that I know has at least something from SG, even if it is little more than a BB team.

As SG are generally on a much smaller scale then they require much less resources to support. Mordheim for example can be entirely supported using fantasy minis with occational source books and specific minis. The only SGs that require a complete level of support are those which use different scale, namely Epic, Gothic and Warmaster. If other, much smaller, miniatures companies can support standalone games then surely GWs market position would allow them to make SGs profitable. Epic used to be a core game after all.

It wouldnt take much in terms of resources for GW to support SGs properly.

Templar Ben
11-05-2009, 15:19
Just curious but how do they have that research. I am not saying they don't have some numbers but I am curious how they got those. They don't collect demographic data at the point of sale, they don't have any data beyond what a CC company would share when online and most online sales are from non-GW websites, and they have no idea how many purchases are from new customers vs established.

I am just curious how a 12 year old outspends a 30 year old. It could happen but I am very curious how that happens.

Perhaps you could just tell us where GW gets their market information.

IJW
11-05-2009, 15:20
It's accurate. Even when the SGs were being supported heavily, stocked in all the shops etc. the division didn't do much more than break even.

Ozorik
11-05-2009, 15:27
Even when the SGs were being supported heavily, stocked in all the shops etc. the division didn't do much more than break even.

That just means that the buisness model needs changing rather than pretending that they dont exist. SGs dont need to be stocked in shops for example, a steady trickle of (metal) releases and the occasional suppliment is all thats needed, plus this would require a minimal cash expenditure.

Are you suggesting that the SG sales figures are in some way tied to the research that GW did over the number of 'vets' who buy GW products? I hope not.

Chaos and Evil
11-05-2009, 15:32
I'd be interested in seeing that research, especially just how it was conducted and what factors it covered.
GW's totally not going to release their research. :)




Why not? Take SGs for example.
Okay...



I'm not entirely sure that this is accurate. I for one have every SG that GW has released in the last 15 years, nearly every other gamer that I know has at least something from SG, even if it is little more than a BB team.
Indeed, but do those purchases compete financially with GW's core game sales?

The numbers don't lie, that the Fanatic Department ran at a loss.


As SG are generally on a much smaller scale then they require much less resources to support. Mordheim for example can be entirely supported using fantasy minis with occational source books and specific minis.

Indeed, but they also promote a buying small number of miniatures. One gang, team or warband and you're done.

GW is rightly more interested in selling huge ammounts of toy soldiers for use in mass battles.


The only SGs that require a complete level of support are those which use different scale, namely Epic, Gothic and Warmaster. If other, much smaller, miniatures companies can support standalone games then surely GWs market position would allow them to make SGs profitable. Epic used to be a core game after all.

Indeed the fall of Epic is probably one of the first examples of GW making a misstep as regards their 'veteran' fanbase, as Epic was typically played by an older demographic.

When Epic Space Marine became Epic 40,000:

- The new rules weren't what the 'veterans' wanted.

- The new miniatures were largely modular multi-part metal (expensive to produce), even minor tanks like Rhinos could be assembled in fifty different combinations (not an exageration).

- Plastic infantry sets were repackaged with less sprues in a box, for a new higher price. Sound familiar? (http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat1300109&prodId=prod2070014)

'veterans' abandoned the game system and GW withdrew active support within six months of the new edition's release...

...the modern edition of Epic (Armageddon) is much more inline with what the fanbase back then would have wanted, but evidently once the fanbase moved on, they were loath to return en masse. Anecdotal evidence suggests the fanbase is very slowly growing again despite the lack of support from GW.



It wouldnt take much in terms of resources for GW to support SGs properly.
Indeed, if GW can produce 50 plastic sprues per year, 5 sprues could be allocated to the SG's.

Pick one SG per year, and those 5 sprues would often make the majority of the game's models completely plastic.

But would it make as much money as cranking out another Baneblade variant?

ryntyrr
11-05-2009, 15:32
Well after reading many of the threads here of how GW has declined, how WD isn't the same etc. etc. I have come to a conclusion. It seems to me that the majority of these people complaining are 'vets' who are just disillusioned because the games are not marketed at them. From the critiscism of stores, to GD to WD it it mostly stems down to something about the kids in some shape or form. GW will try to cater to the demographic that offers them the most money which is kids who will play for roughly a year. Why should they cater to a small number of their demographic?

I would agree with the above. For me it's the wave of "Vets" or anyone above the age of 15 (I may have got the age barriers wrong, this is my preception). That needs to move on to other Gaming companies that cater for them. I hope one day that the older gamers who play GW take your statement to heart. So they may find greener pastures of gaming.

Let GW cater to what they believe "makes the most money." It's their right and also good news for the rest of the gaming industry.

Privateer Press, caters to adults and the like. They have a game called Monster Apocalypse which caters for the 9+ years olds all the way to fully grown men. However Warmachine and Hordes has more of a stronger adult following. Not to say that kids do not play Warmachine and Hordes. Just that I have hardly seen any but tons of adults.

Maybe something to ponder on for those who are deemed as "vets" or just above the age of 15+ : why flog a dead horse?

Bloodknight
11-05-2009, 15:37
It's accurate. Even when the SGs were being supported heavily, stocked in all the shops etc. the division didn't do much more than break even.

I know that I didn't get into any of the SGs because even when they were new you could expect them to cut the support after a while; Gorkamorka and Necromunda, I am looking at you. Especially GoMo.

Cane
11-05-2009, 15:39
I agree with Templar Ben and Ozorik. GW has no good research to back up how they run their business due to a number of factors thats already been listed and the dismal rate GW has been performing in their past fiscal reports.

What GW have succeeded in doing is shrink their customer base and lower their overall amount of sales throughout the years - which can be contributed to the huge costs of running ineffective and inefficient retail chain stores across the globe but mainly in the UK and overpricing their products which us customers do not value as much as their MSRP suggests.

Ozorik
11-05-2009, 15:42
Indeed, but do those purchases compete financially with GW's core game sales

This is where you are misunderstanding me. They dont have to.

SGs could easily be profitable, provided that the appropriate level of support is provided (which doesnt need to be plastic minis). They wont make as much as the core games but given GW's perilous financial straits then any profit is a bonus.


Anecdotal evidence suggests the fanbase is very slowly growing again despite the lack of support from GW.


If there was support from GW would this growth not be accelerated?

I strongly suspect that GW research in this matter is not worth the paper its written on. Thats mainly why I want to see it, its nice to be suprised :)

Llew
11-05-2009, 15:44
According to GW, I don't exist.

I started buying GW games around age 24 or 25. (I can't quite recall now.) It was the SG games that got me (and my friends) into the WFB core game. I wasn't new to gaming, having played D&D since 7th grade and even flirted with the awful Battlesystem game. I have spent, quite literally, thousands and thousands of dollars on GW games and minis since that time. (Although my spending in the past couple years has dropped to perhaps a few hundred dollars in total.) If GW had no specialist games, I would never have picked up WFB. (I was well aware of it, but it just seemed like a bunch of money for a 'primitive' d6 system. SG convinced me d6 systems could be fun.)

This pattern has been followed by at least 5 people in my gaming group that I know. All would happily spend more with GW if they made a more reasonably-priced product. For example, all of my group bought WotR.

Perhaps those of us who say something realize that GW is telling huge, huge piles of money to go blow goats every year, and seems intent on such a policy. Perhaps it seems stupid that a company with so much potential underperforms, and appears to do so out of willful ignorance.

Reinholt
11-05-2009, 15:54
My thoughts:


The ultimate truth is that GW's Core games are primarily intended for kids 11-14, and if GW re-focused primarily on the 'veterans' then they'd have some serious financial hurdles to clear, and would very possibly face losing the support of their core market.

I see this kind of quote frequently, and I have this to say:

If this is true, GW should begin unwinding the company right now and hand money back to their investors. Building a business based solely around that age demographic is foolish; changing consumer trends, the power of fads (remember Pokemon?), and the like mean that you can never truly have a stable position in such a market. It's insanity to try to ride that alone with a high-fixed-cost retail chain model.

I also often see a few other claims:

1 - The GW business model is based around inducting new players, and letting their older customers bleed off.

Well, if so, that's <expletive deleted>ing stupid and whoever came up with that should be fired. Possibly out of a cannon and into the sun. It is always, in all businesses, cheaper to retain your current customers than to acquire new ones. It is also often the case that about ~60-80% of your revenue comes from < 25% of your customers, so if we are talking about who we need to worry about, GW needs to find a way to identify those people (currently they do not have the data, at least in the US, to even begin to do this, partially because independent retailers are not reporting their customer sales, and partially because their stores cannot accurately track them), and then cater to them.

Bottom line, however, is any high churn business is going to do poorly if you have a product you invest time in. You cannot "churn" hobbyists and expect anything other than an eventual long slide into oblivion as people abandon your games.

Now might be an opportune time to mention GW's shrinking player base.

;)

2 - Veterans are profitable / are not profitable.

Who knows? GW doesn't have the data. I suspect anyone who buys their products consistently will turn out to be profitable. More so, for a company that does not advertise, word of mouth marketing is everything, so any move that causes people to say negative things about your company is death on wheels.

3 - SG games are profitable / are not profitable.

Who knows? Given how poorly most of them are supported, it's pretty much impossible to say if a well done skirmish scale game for WFB or 40k would be profitable. It's like asking how profitable cars made by Coca Cola would be.

What GW needs to do with SG is figure out a business model that will work as an entry point for a skirmish game, support this game well and make sure it is a robust, fun system, and also use that to bring people into the other games.

Sonny Liston
12-05-2009, 12:26
Well I think the majority of you have picked up on what I was trying to say. I did not intend there to be a solution and perhaps should have elaborated further on what I was trying to say. I just got a brainwave and had little time to type it. It was one of those things you just have to tpe up before you forget.

I was just trying to say how the common denominator in a lot of the threads complaining about the various aspects of GW seems that the people complaining are genreally in the same bracket. Over 30, veteran gamers who feel abandoned by GW. From the amount of negative things written abuot GW one must conclude either GW is in dire straits or the users of this particular forum seem to be in that particular bracket. This could also apply in many of the other sections in Warseer, for example you cannot enjoy Fantasy because of the overpoweredness of two armies etc. However if all this were true I do not see how GW could still be running as a business at all its that bad.

I'm just trying to make the point that maybe alot of the critiscism is from disillusioned veterans who seem to think the company should be run to cater to them or that it should hark back to the old days when GW cared about its systems. I am of the opinion however that GW is merely a business doing what it sees as best to earn the most money. It is not going to go back to the days of yore when it was a smaller company or more a group of gamers making fun games.

Criticise if you will but this is how I see it...

Chaos and Evil
12-05-2009, 13:01
I'm just trying to make the point that maybe alot of the critiscism is from disillusioned veterans who seem to think the company should be run to cater to them or that it should hark back to the old days when GW cared about its systems...

Although I may seem to be critisizing GW by saying that their games are primarily aimed at 11-14 year-olds, I actually think they're doing exactly the right thing by doing so.

It's eminently sensible for GW to aim their products at the ever-renewing 11-14 year-old demographic (who have always been the most prominent purchasers of GW products).

'veterans' can either:

1- Play GW Core games with that knowlege.
2- Play the 'advanced' Specialist Games (Epic, Warmaster, BoFA).
3- Go find another company to patronise.

Fenrir
12-05-2009, 13:25
I was just trying to say how the common denominator in a lot of the threads complaining about the various aspects of GW seems that the people complaining are genreally in the same bracket. Over 30, veteran gamers who feel abandoned by GW.

Any evidence behind this generalisation?

Son of the Lion
12-05-2009, 13:33
Well after reading many of the threads here of how GW has declined, how WD isn't the same etc. etc. I have come to a conclusion. It seems to me that the majority of these people complaining are 'vets' who are just disillusioned because the games are not marketed at them.

Well hot damn boy! What are you doing wasting your time on internet forums? You should be out there, using your remarkable powers of deduction for the greater good of mankind.

;)


Really though? If you'd read that many threads, you would have surely spotted your conclusion (note: not a solution) appearing frequently in discussions about dissatisfied Vets, as well as the arguments and counter arguments it sparks.

All you've done here is stirred up a very old debate that, quite frankly, I'm surprised to see some of the more established Warseers getting embroiled in....

escobar
12-05-2009, 13:34
GW's totally not going to release their research. :)


Is their research generic industry research bought in (retail trends, toys/games or general kids/teens trends) or are they actively commissioning research - do they have any of their own research to not release :)

I really don't see they can have a good handle on their customers for lots of reasons outlined by others.

Google tells me GW are recruiting a US based 'Marketing Initiatives Manager' so maybe new initiatives in this area are in the offing...

Gazak Blacktoof
12-05-2009, 13:41
At the moment option 3 seems increasingly appealing.

If they were being sensible they'd ensure the bleed off of veteran gamers was into their own games for veteran gamers. GW might not have an serious competition for position as top dog but (using a dog metaphor) they shouldn't simply be chewing on their own leg.

Currently there's no support for the games and armies I want to play.

EmperorNorton
12-05-2009, 13:51
Although I may seem to be critisizing GW by saying that their games are primarily aimed at 11-14 year-olds, I actually think they're doing exactly the right thing by doing so.

It's eminently sensible for GW to aim their products at the ever-renewing 11-14 year-old demographic (who have always been the most prominent purchasers of GW products).

Anecdotal as it may be, I've never seen an 11-14 year old buying any GW product.
Among the several dozen people I know who play GW games - mostly Blood Bowl, as a matter of fact - all are 20+ years old.
The customers I see in GW stores seem to be younger, but not by far.

IJW
12-05-2009, 14:00
Anecdotal as it may be, I've never seen an 11-14 year old buying any GW product.
Hmm. GW customers in Germany must be a lot older than they are in the UK.

Whenever I look through the doors of the local store on a weekend or school break events all you can see is a sea of kids in that age bracket. It's marked enough that the older players specifically avoid the store on those days.

I also went on a coach trip up to Warhammer World a month or so ago that the store had arranged - apart from a scattering of older gamers like myself, ALL the other customers on the coach were 10-16 in age. Many of them were dropped off at the shop in the morning by their parents.

Osbad
12-05-2009, 14:04
Hmm. GW customers in Germany must be a lot older than they are in the UK.

Whenever I look through the doors of the local store on a weekend or school break events all you can see is a sea of kids in that age bracket. It's marked enough that the older players specifically avoid the store on those days.

I also went on a coach trip up to Warhammer World a month or so ago that the store had arranged - apart from a scattering of older gamers like myself, ALL the other customers on the coach were 10-16 in age. Many of them were dropped off at the shop in the morning by their parents.

I suspect most "older" UK gamers buy GW stuff, if they still do, online and at discount, and play at home or in their clubs.

There used to be regular "vets nights" in stores running til 10pm, but nowadays they are patchy at best.

I suspect many older gamers dislike the overwhelming presence of juveniles in their gaming sessions, and are wised up to not paying full MSRP for product.

It doesn't mean they don't exist though. Although GW would perhaps believe it does.

Reinholt
12-05-2009, 14:06
Actually, the 11-14 demographic is not necessarily ever-renewing. Take a country like Japan where the population is actually shrinking, and you can have situations where the young are not being replaced quick enough.

Likewise, my point is that 11-14 year olds are fickle; if your business is entirely based upon them or you cater to them, at some point you are going to take a hard shot in the pants when consumer trends change.

Lastly, I suspect 11-14 year olds do not drive the majority of sales. I think this is a myth based on cognitive immediacy (we all remember the annoying, screaming kid, but how many people remember the quiet hobbyist who walks in, says a hello or two, grabs a box and some paint, and leaves?) rather than fact.

IJW
12-05-2009, 14:10
Yes, it's a very hard one to judge.

On the one hand you have vets like myself who basically don't buy anything new (web discount or not) apart from the occasional rulebook/expansion, one the other hand you have vets that walk in and buy three Baneblades. And then a Shadowsword a bit later.

Reinholt
12-05-2009, 14:17
Yes, it's a very hard one to judge.

It's trivial to judge if you just collect the right sales data, though!

There are plenty of companies that do this. The fact that GW does not seem to have a handle on this is one of their main problems; they don't really know much about their customers, ironically.

zedeyejoe
12-05-2009, 14:40
GW will try to cater to the demographic that offers them the most money which is kids who will play for roughly a year. Why should they cater to a small number of their demographic?

Well I think general business principles are to find customers and hang on to them because there is a stiff cost in finding new customers.

Difficult to say how it actually works in numbers but until recently I have been spending £3000 a year on GW stuff. So how many child customers does that make me worth?

freddythebig
12-05-2009, 21:35
I suspect most "older" UK gamers buy GW stuff, if they still do, online and at discount, and play at home or in their clubs.

There used to be regular "vets nights" in stores running til 10pm, but nowadays they are patchy at best.

I suspect many older gamers dislike the overwhelming presence of juveniles in their gaming sessions, and are wised up to not paying full MSRP for product.

It doesn't mean they don't exist though. Although GW would perhaps believe it does.

As an 'older' UK gamer myself, this pretty well sums me up and I am pretty sure that I exist whatever GW thinks.
I am also spending most of my money these days on the competition that GW apparently doesn't believe exists either.

lanrak
12-05-2009, 21:37
HI all.
I cannot see why GW HAS to target newbs OR vets?
IF they produced products thier customers wanted at a price point percived to give value for money.
They would be a lot better off than producing products they think the customers want , at a price point they think they will pay.IMO.

In the same way GW have high quality asthetics that appeal to a wide range of people.(All, ages and levels of experiance.)

If the rule sets and game ballance for 40k (and WH), were of a similar high standard , they would appeal to a wider audience.

TTFN
lanrak.

Chaos and Evil
12-05-2009, 21:47
If the rule sets and game ballance for 40k (and WH), were of a similar high standard , they would appeal to a wider audience.

I think that GW's core rule systems are of a high standard... it's just that that standard is tailored towards newbies.

Crazy Harborc
13-05-2009, 01:38
Vets grow into adulthood they marry, have children, have careers. They watch their children grow. They search around for games to play with their children. They search for.....hobbies to do with those children. Those parents, those vets of GW's games, of GW's products will decide IF GW is a toy maker whose toys might or might NOT be suitable for their children.;)

Lord of Worms
13-05-2009, 06:51
One thing I should point out is that in my opinion, it is easier to introduce totally new players into the game using SG. Every new player that plays in my 40k group now started by joining a Necromunda or Mordheim campaign. First, they borrowed a gang, then they bought one and painted it up. After a couple months, they were saying "you know I like having a squad of guys, I think I'll go for an army". It's a lot easier for a new player to swallow a $50 entry cost instead of several-hundred. Then, when they're really into it they'll buy an army.

Also, I think that the greatest difficulty when starting the hobby isn't the gameplay rules per se, but army design. It's a lot easier for a person to get a feel for "what-does-what" when all you're dealing with are pistols, rifles and machine-guns. It's just common-sense, as opposed to all these different alien races; "Space Elves?", "Gundem-Communists?" WTF? (Real n00b quieries, BTW)

All in all I say that the whole "SG is only for vets" concept is a myth. It's a great low-cost introduction to get people interested.

Chaos and Evil
13-05-2009, 22:22
All in all I say that the whole "SG is only for vets" concept is a myth. It's a great low-cost introduction to get people interested.

The SG's as a whole are not just for 'veterans', but three of them are.

- Mordheim
- Necromunda
- Inquisitor
- Battlefleet Gothic

Are all written for a similar audience to the core games.

- Epic
- Warmaster
- Battle of Five Armies

Are all written for experienced wargamers, or 'veterans' if you prefer.

Bregalad
14-05-2009, 00:11
Basically, GW's problem is its complete economic incompetence with business decisions worse than an uneducated man with common sense would do. For each business decision they roll a d6 with 4 sides "raise prices", one side "fire staff" and one side "Space Marine release". It obviously didn't work the last years and it obviously will not work in the future. They lose customers and don't gain new ones. Even with steep price hikes, turnover sinks or is stable at best.

The solution is simple:
1.) Do marketing. Advertise. Attend GenCon and other independent fairs. Go where the potential customers are and deal with them in a friendly way. Make GW known. Work together with those PC, book and boardgame companies that use GW-IP (Warhammer Online, Fantasy Flight Games, Dawn of War, ...)
2.) Current price structure is stupid and counterproductive. Not affordable by the target customers, the teens. So no new gamers and automatic shrinking of market. Just make products affordable again and remember, plastic is cheaper than gold! Learn from Japan, how to make much cheaper and much better plastic products.
3.) Concerning "go where potential customers are": Rerelease introductory games like Space Hulk and Warhammer Quest, advertise them and sell them in normal toy stores. It worked in the past, it will work again. I have been demanding this for years as a simple solution to their business problems. Perhaps they finally understood.
4.) Stop fighting customers and stop fighting Indie stores. They are GW's allies, so treat them with respect. Learn from other friendly companies (or FW) how to establish good relationships with customers. And stop thinking that only UK matters.
5.) Quit the "one release per army per generation" nonsense. It is stupid and uneconomical to let customers wait 10-12 YEARS for new products of their favorite army.

These are the biggest issues, I guess. Would improve GW's financial situation within a year.

Lord of Worms
14-05-2009, 00:38
The SG's as a whole are not just for 'veterans', but three of them are.

- Mordheim
- Necromunda
- Inquisitor
- Battlefleet Gothic

Are all written for a similar audience to the core games.

- Epic
- Warmaster
- Battle of Five Armies

Are all written for experienced wargamers, or 'veterans' if you prefer.

Fair enough.

Ravenous
14-05-2009, 00:41
This may shed some light: http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa298/Ravenouspainting/Hobbycone.jpg

Notice where SG is and where the Academy aka kid training sessions are.

Chaos and Evil
14-05-2009, 01:05
Yup, that looks like GW's priorities to me.

ryntyrr
14-05-2009, 01:27
Well I think the majority of you have picked up on what I was trying to say. I did not intend there to be a solution and perhaps should have elaborated further on what I was trying to say. I just got a brainwave and had little time to type it. It was one of those things you just have to tpe up before you forget.

I was just trying to say how the common denominator in a lot of the threads complaining about the various aspects of GW seems that the people complaining are genreally in the same bracket. Over 30, veteran gamers who feel abandoned by GW. From the amount of negative things written abuot GW one must conclude either GW is in dire straits or the users of this particular forum seem to be in that particular bracket. This could also apply in many of the other sections in Warseer, for example you cannot enjoy Fantasy because of the overpoweredness of two armies etc. However if all this were true I do not see how GW could still be running as a business at all its that bad.

I'm just trying to make the point that maybe alot of the critiscism is from disillusioned veterans who seem to think the company should be run to cater to them or that it should hark back to the old days when GW cared about its systems. I am of the opinion however that GW is merely a business doing what it sees as best to earn the most money. It is not going to go back to the days of yore when it was a smaller company or more a group of gamers making fun games.

Criticise if you will but this is how I see it...


I think you are spot on correct. I would also suggest that the "veterans/adults." Now have better alternatives to TTG and collecting via other good gaming companies.

I would also suggest that GW will surrive the culling or the self sacrificing of it's "veterans/adults" through it's various methods of highly successful ways of alienating that part of it's customer base & I hope it continues to do so. I am under the imperission that the decline of the "vets/adults" has been accelerated allot faster with the clever and robust initiatives such as price hikes & clever armybook/armies revamping and making them the next best thing to buy making the next army harder than the previous ones. This works very well with its 7-15 year old customer base as most of them just want to play with some really cool models and may have not yet thought on a basis of army/game balance. Untill they come upon realisation that it's not them that gives them the successive defeats and few victories, just that they had a poorly thought out armybook agianst their mates uber army book (it's not pretty when they come to that realisation and yes some of them then come on warseer to share their anger when they do!). When you get older you tend think more deeper ( not true for everyone) about the stuff you do.

However that said where I do disagree with you is "I do not see how GW could still be running as a business at all its that bad". Just purely from it's contraction of the past few years and waves of redundancies and store closures. Now having staffing levels to the bare minimum. I would say GW has tried to do its best, with what it has. The problem is what it has isn't & wasn't very good to start with.

"What it has." Is up to you and for every individual, it would be 10 different things to each individual. So I'll leave that up to your imagination or precieved knowledged based on solid facts or second hand.

I lookforward to the day that Warseer forums one day become a forum where not only dose it have excellent GW sections but more representation and sections for other Games systems.

Templar Ben
14-05-2009, 01:50
This may shed some light: http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa298/Ravenouspainting/Hobbycone.jpg

Notice where SG is and where the Academy aka kid training sessions are.


Yup, that looks like GW's priorities to me.

I don't know if that is priorities or if that is the perceived relative market size.

Chaos and Evil
14-05-2009, 01:56
I don't know if that is priorities or if that is the perceived relative market size.

I assume that both correlate.

Templar Ben
14-05-2009, 02:00
Well that is presuming that the margin is the same across all items or that a decrease in margin matches with an increase in volume.
Given the wild differences in metal vs plastic, paint vs paper, high volume vs low volume it really isn't as simple as "all gamers need a brush but only 40K players need that rulebook". Also just because a market would be all gamers of Fantasy doesn't mean that all gamers of Fantasy would buy Fantasy specific dice.

There is just a bit more that goes into that.

GraveGuard
14-05-2009, 02:35
I think about GW therefore I am!

There are some things I still don't get/understand and perhaps someone who has done more through research and what not could explain it to me:

1) If GW insist on no marketing (well not mainstream or any standard type) and rely on pretty much just word of mouth, why would they disregard, ignore, brush off, not cater for, screw veterans/those people who are the ones most likely to help/do this for them?
2) Where is the proof that Young Teens/Kids/Tweens/whatevers are GW most spendy customers than Vets, Adults, Older Gamers that people keep saying are?
3) Surely it is Adults and generally therefore Parents that spend the most money on GW products not the kids themselves so why don't they market (pfft) tha demographic?
4) Surely appealing to just one demographic is a daft idea, isn't it better to appeal to a wide audience (yes I know Wargaming is a Niche Market) so why not appeal to ALL of the "Wargaming Demographic" as opposed to just the Tween/Young Teen/Kid Wargamming Demographic?
5) Wargaming is a Niche Market and is only going to appeal to a small number of people anyway regardless of marketing - eg: its pointless trying to market a specific Sci Fi film/book/game to people who don't like sci-fi. Usually those already instrested in similar areas/things. So why do GW keep trying to? And insist on it?

ryntyrr
14-05-2009, 02:45
Hey Grave, *Shurgs* I can only suggest what I posted above. Beyond that your guess is as good as mine

Lord of Worms
14-05-2009, 02:50
I think about GW therefore I am!
3) Surely it is Adults and generally therefore Parents that spend the most money on GW products not the kids themselves so why don't they market (pfft) tha demographic?
\

That demographic isn't who pays for it, it's who wants it. The targeted demographic for Barbie isn't dudes in their 30s/40 (even though they obviously pay for it).

Chaos and Evil
14-05-2009, 02:59
There is just a bit more that goes into that.

To be honest I'm suprised that SG even features in that chart, it must be fairly old.

GraveGuard
14-05-2009, 03:08
That demographic isn't who pays for it, it's who wants it. The targeted demographic for Barbie isn't dudes in their 30s/40 (even though they obviously pay for it).
But they still have to have an appeal to them, okay not in that way (as in I want one) but in the "do I want my kid playing with those/that?" Is this the best thing for them? Is it anygood? Will it keep them off my back for more than 30mins? etc

Ravenous
14-05-2009, 03:14
As I recall GW addressed (years ago)the vet effect with saying something along the lines of:

"You know everything there is to know, you know where to get it and when, there is nothing more we can offer you so we are going to focus on recruiting the next generation"

Then they raised prices and killed the bitz program, soooo take it for what you will.

Chaos and Evil
14-05-2009, 03:14
But they still have to have an appeal to them, okay not in that way (as in I want one) but in the "do I want my kid playing with those/that?" Is this the best thing for them? Is it anygood? Will it keep them off my back for more than 30mins? etc

And GW games do appeal to parents.

They are creative games, require learning skills such as painting, require time and dedication to complete a painted army, and the standard of writing in the Codexes and Army Books is not low so they will probably gain a greater understanding of the written word through reading them. The games are also sociable so they can either play GW games with friends, or meet new friends through the hobby.

All of the above is appealing for parents.

Templar Ben
14-05-2009, 03:28
To be honest I'm suprised that SG even features in that chart, it must be fairly old.

I imagine they would want to include everything they do. Without SG on the chart then why given them bandwidth on the server? That sort of thing.

See if the focus was like that then one would expect to see more items that are usable in all games. Instead of so much effort being spent on things like Cities of Death Terrain then there would be more on Chaos Terrain which would be usable in both or Elven/Eldar Terrain which would be usable in both.

I am sure they were sure that Imperial only terrain would sell better than Chaos but Chaos would have a larger market since it would be for Fantasy as well. That is why it isn't quite as simple as just more people need X to play.

silashand
14-05-2009, 03:29
It's not a vet/not vet issue.

Actually it is, but not in the way a lot of people think. GW does not advertise. The only way they have been able to spread the word about their games in the past has been via word of mouth, and the primary means of doing that is via long-term committed players who encourage new people to join the hobby. By pushing these individuals out it eliminates a major mechanism GW has relied on for years to pump new blood into the system they created.

Based solely on their declining sales numbers from 2002 (this is fact, anyone can check it out on their investor relations page), the number of new players that replace the ones who leave is down significantly in recent years and continues to drop. Unless something changes drastically in the near future (and I have no reason to believe it will) this trend will continue. Unfortunately it is a downward spiral with a definite end point. Eventually the new customers/higher prices will not be able to compensate for those lost and at that point GW will fail. At least this part is not rocket science. Either they need to reinvigorate their primary mechanism for generating new hobby blood or they need to find some other way to do so via advertising, marketing, whatever. Failure to do either, which is what they are doing now, will see them collapse. There is no other end which is viable given their current numbers and strategy.

Cheers, Gary

Lord of Worms
14-05-2009, 05:36
But they still have to have an appeal to them, okay not in that way (as in I want one) but in the "do I want my kid playing with those/that?" Is this the best thing for them? Is it anygood? Will it keep them off my back for more than 30mins? etc

Yeah, they approve the products so they have the be Pg-13 and keep them busy. It's not the same thing, though. The plan is to have Jimmy beg for stuff instead of parents saying "Here Jimmy, I found a viable alternative to hanging out with street-gangs for you".

Ozorik
14-05-2009, 11:01
Well its unlikely to include paying £25 for 10 plastic men. Very few people will be impressed by that price, the minis are small and the box weighs next to nothing. If you were a parent who knew nothing of wargaming then there really is very little preceived value for money there. Thats obviously dependant on the individual but far more people will just put the box back on the shelf and go and buy something with more percieved worth.

Osbad
14-05-2009, 12:12
Well its unlikely to include paying £25 for 10 plastic men. Very few people will be impressed by that price, the minis are small and the box weighs next to nothing. If you were a parent who knew nothing of wargaming then there really is very little preceived value for money there. Thats obviously dependant on the individual but far more people will just put the box back on the shelf and go and buy something with more percieved worth.

QFT.

I have often heard said that the value of the models lies not in what you actually get, but in the hours of fun and enjoyment you will derive from painting and playing with them.

Which is so much balony it makes me steam at the ears every time I hear it!

I don't mind them charging for the raw materials, nor the artistry that turns base plastic or pewter into a beautiful model. I *do* mind them charging me for what I am going to do with them when I get them home!

*I* supply the time to stick the models together, *I* supply the energy and skill which decorates them, *I* supply the imagination that turns these little pieces of plastic into great warriors in my head. What the feth are GW doing having the temerity to charge me for my own contribution to the hobby?

All they provide is a few little pieces of plastic or metal and a rulebook. The raw materials. Everything else (unless I'm a n00b needing tuition) comes from my own head!

It's like going to a builders merchant for a pallet of bricks and being told the price you pay reflects the fact that they will one day be a house, and not just the cuboids of baked mud that they really are! Utter madness!

Yet it makes sense to GW!

freddythebig
14-05-2009, 18:49
I think about GW therefore I am!



But if I don't only think about GW am I not?........I think not.

lanrak
14-05-2009, 19:27
Hi all.
A thought just struck me.

What if GWs real problem is that a hobby company is not viable as a multimillion pound multi national corperate PLC?

Perhaps Tom Kirby and co are running GW PLC into the ground on purpouse?
Ready for a managment buy out when GW returns to a stable trading size?

Just a crazy idea to try to explain some totaly retarded buisness decisions by GW senior managment.

TTFN
Lanrak.

ryntyrr
14-05-2009, 20:09
Lanrak. I completly disagree with you and find the comment a little insulting. Even though I have nothing to do with GW.

I think the GW board of directors are great and same goes with middle management. They are not hardlined capatalist in the persuit of money. No, no and no. They are avid corperate socialists. They are deliberatly declining their market share and their hold to"share the love" or the market with other more hungry cuthroat business's. Their whole intention is to shrink their business with their good socialist principles. It does not matter if they degrade their own IP through rulsets. Or narrow their consumer base through price hikes. No their vision is bigger than yours and mine.

They want to bring and end to this chapter (GWs dominance or maybe GW itself) or some sort of end where others pick up where they have left and do it allot better. We should praise their humility. Ok so some people lose their lively hoods in GW and others have to work twice as hard in GW to maintain their job.

To suggest otherwise would suggest the "totaly retarded buisness decisions by GW senior managment". Which would further suggest that they are retarded and I cannot accept that and would challenge anyone who would state that.

Some animals are just here for the culling. Lets just accept it

Llew
14-05-2009, 20:55
Hi all.
A thought just stuck me.

What if GWs real problem is that a hobby company is not viable as a multimillion pound multi national corperate PLC?

Perhaps Tom Kirby and co are running GW PLC into the ground on purpouse?
Ready for a managment buy out when GW returns to a stable trading size?

Just a crazy idea to try to explain some totaly retarded buisness decisions by GW senior managment.

TTFN
Lanrak.

First, that sort of thing is widely frowned upon. It's called bad management, and fraud and probably a lot of very technical legal terms.

Second, they haven't positioned themselves as saviors once the company tanks. Ideally, if you run that sort of scheme, you have a beloved former CEO or someone waiting in the wings to come in and scoop up the company for a song, and reap all the age-old loyalty of old customers with dreams of former glory.

Third, they're working so hard to actually **** off those old customers that they couldn't hope for that turnaround.

Of course, the biggest problem is that your opening premise is flawed. GW can, quite easily, be a multi-million pound, multi-national hobby company. But not if they insist on trying to emulate the UK model wherever they do business. They'd need to actively recruit allies and they've done a poor job of that.

Ravenous
15-05-2009, 04:40
Hi all.
A thought just stuck me.

What if GWs real problem is that a hobby company is not viable as a multimillion pound multi national corperate PLC?

Perhaps Tom Kirby and co are running GW PLC into the ground on purpouse?
Ready for a managment buy out when GW returns to a stable trading size?

Just a crazy idea to try to explain some totaly retarded buisness decisions by GW senior managment.

TTFN
Lanrak.

That actually crossed my mind, I mean GW handed the company over to actual business people and they are running it even worse then the gamers, now this tells me they are either complete idiots or they know full well what is going to happen made a 10 year (or more) plan to run the company into the dirt so much they'll get bought out and those left in charge will get coushy packages to retire on.

Son of the Lion
15-05-2009, 08:14
First, that sort of thing is widely frowned upon. It's called bad management, and fraud and probably a lot of very technical legal terms.

Oh absolutely, I imagine the FSA or the Labour government would take a very stern view on such practices - they might wag their fingers a little bit, or possibly even teach the company a severe lesson by lending them a ton of public cash with no clearly defined repayment plan :p.



Second, they haven't positioned themselves as saviors once the company tanks. Ideally, if you run that sort of scheme, you have a beloved former CEO or someone waiting in the wings to come in and scoop up the company for a song, and reap all the age-old loyalty of old customers with dreams of former glory.

Third, they're working so hard to actually **** off those old customers that they couldn't hope for that turnaround.


How do you know they don't have someone lined up?

"Listen up, loyal GW fans - we are aware that the evil businessmens have been ruining our beloved hobby and sodomising your wallets for their own personal benefit. But fear not! for we, the repressed 'true' GW staffers have overthrown the evil overlords and a new golden era is dawning - to lead the way, John Blanche / Rick Priestly / Jervis Johnson / <insert favourite old time GW Staffer here> is returning as CEO! Yay!..........What's that? Oh, yeah. See you later Tom. Party starts at eight? Cool, see you there. Nice Ferrari by the way."


I actually agree with you that this is highly unlikely, I'm just not convinced by your argument :)

doombanner
15-05-2009, 17:04
Well after reading many of the threads here of how GW has declined, how WD isn't the same etc. etc. I have come to a conclusion. It seems to me that the majority of these people complaining are 'vets' who are just disillusioned because the games are not marketed at them. From the critiscism of stores, to GD to WD it it mostly stems down to something about the kids in some shape or form. GW will try to cater to the demographic that offers them the most money which is kids who will play for roughly a year. Why should they cater to a small number of their demographic?

OP you make an interesting point, one that has a lot of cross over with the comics industry; mainly that people start bitching when they reach the age that comics aren't for them anymore.

"Meh, why doesn't Batman kill the Joker? I mean, he's just going to break out of Arkham Asylum again and kill people? Batman would be saving countles lives by killing him off! whinewhinewhine..."

Of course what these people fail to notice is that Batman hasn't killed off the Joker in the last fifty years, and it's pretty safe to say that he won't be killing them off in the next fifty years, either.

But the thing is, Warhammer doesn't get old in the same way comics do. Sure there are some rare fans who can understand the medium for what it is, but most people get enraged when something like One More Day happens.

Warhammer, and wargames in particular, can be enjoyed as an adult as well.

No, what I think bothers people is GW's attitude toward their customers. The attitude that looks down on older games, or disregards them purely because they can make enough money off the kids.

This is a terrible attutude, that no right-thinking business should have. All dollars should be welcome, no money should be turned away. GW is very successful, but we've seen them turn a loss for several quarters now, even though they keep raising prices. Older gamers get older, they cycle out, and if there aren't any (or enough) new players to replace them, then it's lost profit.

At this point, GW should be happy for any money, they get, but the older fans aren't having it.

In the end, it's a classic case of, "you get what you give."

~Doom Banner

Chaos and Evil
15-05-2009, 17:28
OP you make an interesting point, one that has a lot of cross over with the comics industry; mainly that people start bitching when they reach the age that comics aren't for them anymore.

Indeed, and often instead of moving over to reading 'older focused' Comics (or older-focused Wargames like Epic), they often either keep buying & complaining, or quit.

As an adult, you can appreciate the Core games for what they are, and in that light, have fun with them... just as long as you understand they were never meant as tournament-balanced wargames with deep tactical complexity.

yabbadabba
16-05-2009, 18:24
No, what I think bothers people is GW's attitude toward their customers. The attitude that looks down on older games, or disregards them purely because they can make enough money off the kids.
~Doom Banner
I always got the impression that GW regarded me as an adult, with the ability to look after myself, make my own decisions and ask for help where needed. Once you realise that an awful lot of GW's marketing effort is aimed at kids and newbies, you understand that GW are just letting you get on with your hobby without hassling you.
Prices as an adult with a job are not an issue. We all faces choices every day of whether we can afford something or not. The great thing about wargames is as a hobby there is always something to do, so you don't have to focus on buying the latest shiny thing.
GW also know I have the saavy to shop around and take advantage of cheaper priced products from the interweb and sales. They know if I am desperate for something, or need a conveniance shop, their stores and stockists are ideal. They also know if I don't mind the wait and want the lowest possible price I will shop around - and chances are buy something from an online discounter.
If fact they only thing I really want from GW personally is a bit more support with advanced rules, units and campaigns. But as they are focussing on getting new customers into the business, I will have to find a new gaming group (just moved) and we will have to change the rules to our own preference. Not a bug issue really.

Lord Malorne
16-05-2009, 18:47
Hmmm has anyone asked why GW does not advertise?

yabbadabba
16-05-2009, 18:59
Hmmm has anyone asked why GW does not advertise?

Yes. They had a policy for years of it not being worth the money. Now, after their LotR experience I reckon that they will question the ability of a niche business's ability to survive such interest levels.

Lord Malorne
16-05-2009, 19:03
Yes. They had a policy for years of it not being worth the money. Now, after their LotR experience I reckon that they will question the ability of a niche business's ability to survive such interest levels.

Haha classic GW :D.

Reinholt
16-05-2009, 20:33
That actually crossed my mind, I mean GW handed the company over to actual business people and they are running it even worse then the gamers, now this tells me they are either complete idiots or they know full well what is going to happen made a 10 year (or more) plan to run the company into the dirt so much they'll get bought out and those left in charge will get coushy packages to retire on.

I find it a bit dishonest to lay the blame at the feet of "business people".

Let's be blunt. The cream of the crop in the business community are not running GW; the guys they have running the company now have made repeated elementary mistakes that would have had them fired long ago where I work.

In the same sense that the 'gamers' previously running GW didn't do a good job, and now the 'business people' running GW didn't do a good job, the truth of the matter should emerge:

Running a business well is a non-trivial enterprise, and a lot of people are bad at it.

The problem is that GW doesn't have good managers. I couldn't care less if they were shepherds, businessmen, bankers, footballers, or ditch diggers before they took over if they know what they are doing and run the business well. The skills needed to do that are often those that cannot be reliably found in any particular profession, but rather are exceptional to have, which partially explains why really good executives make so much damned money (the fact that compensation committees are rigged in their favor also explains why bad executives still tend to make good money, but that's another story for another day).

Ravenous
17-05-2009, 04:18
True enough, but at least when the gamers in charge the enviroment was a little more fun and they supported its customers, but then again that was a decade ago and that might just be me looking through rose tinted glasses.

TimLeeson
17-05-2009, 06:45
I can only speak for myself and my friends in real-life, and we may very well be a minority that is too small to be profitable but it is simply the lack of originality that has pushed us away from wargaming (in general, not just 40k), the things we want simply dont exist in miniature/army form (more abstract and alien aliens ect) we do however have alot of income (I alone could afford to spend about £10,000 pounds per year average) but that money is not going into anything since the products arent there. In the age range, we are in our early 20's, there are about a dozen or so of us in total.

No idea if my perspective is useful or not to this discussion, but I thought id put it into this thread anyway.

yabbadabba
17-05-2009, 07:31
Haha classic GW :D.

I actually think they are right. A rerelease of Space Hulk or 'Quest would be fine advertised on tv/radio - but not 40K, WFB LotR or any of the others.

They did advertise LotR in a few wargames magazines but that doesn't fit their drive of finding customers new to the market.

freddythebig
17-05-2009, 11:39
The single biggest reason that my sons and most of their friends got into LotR a few years back was the deal that they did with DeAgostini with the BGiME magazine.
This was advertised on the telly quite a bit and drew in a good number of new customers.
In fact despite being a historical modeller and wargamer for over 30 years, I had never considered anything from GW myself before.
Since then, I have bought stuff for LoTR, WHFB and WH40K, all because of the telly ads for BGiME.
Just my personal experience but perhaps I am not the only one.

Llew
18-05-2009, 17:15
Actually, the solution to GW's problem is easier than we think. I've been reading Mr. Orwell's "1984" again for amusement.

GW needs to just say, "In celebration of the fabulous growth in the world economy, GW is reducing the price of the brand-new Greatswords to only $41. Other products will soon receive similar price reductions, making it even easier for you to play GW inexpensively!"

Simple. Just doublethink it.

isaac
18-05-2009, 17:35
Classic, now we need to keep all copies of 1984 away from GW

Bregalad
18-05-2009, 18:18
Too late, they are sueing Orwell for leaking their business policy ;)