Why Games Workshop is not a good business

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I am with you on that one, expect on one point. I have never labeled GW bad. I have said they are not good.

Sorry, re-reading the thread I see that it was other posters claiming that you labeled them bad. I do agree that 'not good' does not equal 'bad' as I tried to express with my use of the term 'typical.' Any company can toe the line and make a profit. Good companies, IMO, do more than that.

 

[Cor Azer]

Your tone comes actually a lot softer than mine, so I shan't complain!

I am not trying to be rude or anything. I do have a rather harsh style of writing. Partly that English is not my mother tongue, partly that I am a rather blunt man and partly because I am used to use the tone of my voice to convey the emotion of what I write, rather than the selection of words.

So I'd say if I sound like a dickhead (I know I do sometimes), just add a smile to the words and you probably are close to the tone I had in my mind when I typed.

NEVAR! Words are all we have! It's what separates man from the animals!

It was sincere and meant. I only added the explanation as I didn't want you to think I was just being patronising. Misguided and undeserving, I did have my reasons say what I said and I thought appropriate to explain myself rather than just let it hang.

I don't really do insincerity... takes too much time and I am appalling at it!

Being an expert at patronizing (at least, so says my wife), I tend not to assume others do so. Again, idealist.

Are you calling the GW miniatures product for children?

OK, when I go to a convention like, say Salute (wargame convention in the UK . I am assuming you're in the USA, sorry if I am getting that wrong) the people there are not all that young. There is a lot of young people, but there is also a TON of guys in their 40s and 50s into wargames.

Last time I went to the GW shop in Brighton, some 5 years ago, there were three older guys playing, probably late 40s or early 50's.

That is the kind of audience they could build up upon directly.

Then there are the people who are into the boardgames and RPGs who could be directly targeted by the companies that produce the games (FFC). I'll elaborate on that one a bit lower down in this post.

Actually, the first reference I saw to children was, I think, by you (although I'm too lazy to re-read the thread to check. It was actually something that baffled me - I've never seen it as a hobby targeted at kids, seeing as it's far too expensive for $5 allowances (or whatever kids are weedling out of their parents these days). Sure, I've seen some kids at it, but never anywhere near the same level as the college-age crowd.

As mentioned before though, those older crowds buy direct by catalogue or online. They don't need the painting lessons or introductory gametime that the GW shops are really intended to supply. So... there's not really a whole that can be put in stores to draw them in, except possibly more tourneys and game days, which GW does pretty substantially. Still, they've got their ways of purchasing and few are like to change.

Interesting that, unrelated to this post, someone in my office made a similar comment while we laughed at the office today. Again, add a smile to that and that's closer to how I meant it. I really didn't mean to be offensive.

It was me. I'm really good at the stalking thing.

It's not really an "either/or" situation for me. The way they use their space in their shops is not particularly efficient.

That's a taste thing. I love wide open stores, and absolutely detest crowded aisles. My wife and I actually skip the two closest supermarkets to our house because they try to stuff too much into aisles that are already too tight.

And again, since the goal in the stores is teaching play and painting, they need wide open spaces for tables, and to allow for gathered crowds.

I think it'd help their business by attracting a different, if related, clientèle. And yes, I truly believe it would help them. For starters it would attract me! I have, easily, £500 in GW boardgames and RPGs.

Actually, make it closer to £1000 since I have a couple of limited editions. I had to buy that in Amazon (a lot less margin for them) or directly from FFG (eye-watering postage costs, I can tell you!). That is £1000 they could have got in their shop. I can't be the only one.

I'm not denying that it would attract some people, but would those people be enough to cover the profit gap? I just don't believe it, but we'll not get tangible evidence in either direction.

Please don't get me started on their advertising. In there I downright thing they are utter !

The thing is that I don't think they would have to advertise too much. FFG already advertises, they'd just have to say "also available in GW stores" and people would know.

A little addition to their newsletter to let people know that they can now get other GW products in their shops would also do some of the work for them.

Shop windows are an incredible asset. I took a diploma in shop-window design years ago and I can tell you that the use they make of their shop windows is absolutely appalling. If they used just a 25% of that space to show the gorgeous illustrations in the boxes or their games, they would get, easily, 75% more attention from passing people.

I'll defer to your expertise on shop windows. My experience extends to... looking at them. And I will doubleplusgood your opinion of their advertising.

That said, if it would require advertising to bring in a new demographic, I would prefer them invest that amount instead at improving their current demographic.

Damn you blew my cover!

Ah my friend.. if anything I am indeed an idealist. I just let my cynicism gets the better of me.

Wow... a cynic who thinks he's an idealist... that's some idealistic thinking, my friend

<Cynic>My friend, I have worked for corporations in the past. Also, I work on a daily basis with some of the biggest companies in the UK. Corporations that make billions. Trust me, competence comes in VERY short supply!</cynic>

Your position is probably wiser than mine!

Well, there are too things going on here. I said that I assume general competency in one's area of expertise, true. My experience, however, is that many corporations don't leave people in their area of expertise. The Peter Principle.

I work in government, IT specifically. There are plenty of excellent programmers, designers, etc... Very few of them have any real management skills. I dread them being promoted up the chain.

And, to be honest, I truly hope I never see them. I absolutely ADORE these debates and I admit that slacking GW is a bit of a guilty pleasure of mine!

Then I'm glad to be an enabler

Certainly, and the fact that we make different assumptions derives in conversation, which, I am really pleased to say, we are managing to keep to civil levels. Not something that can be said of everyone, so gentle tap in our backs!

Civility? For hells no... Bring on the tar!

There is a parallel. They were photos. GW would still sell games. Different games, but games nonetheless.

As for the advertising, I really think GW is at it, but also that they wouldn't have to change much.

You can't just say 'GW sells games'. The sell miniatures; they're the moneymakers. The games are just a means to spur people into selecting which miniatures to buy. The licensed products don't really drive miniature sales. You don't need miniatures at all with the licensed video games, and, excepting the GM, players may or may not buy one model.

Alas, but I'm too unfamiliar with the photo industry to think of a comparable.

You are right, it's a matter of taking the risk. That's where I disagree. I think that not taking that risk makes it less good. And I say so because I believe the risk would be small and the benefits would be worth it.

I can't see the benefits being as huge as you think, and the costs would be greater than you seem to project.

Maybe this is a bit simplistic, but wouldn't it be easy if the product from FFG is sent to GW's distribution centre and the boxes are shipped with the miniatures? That's why I think they already have the infrastructure there.

Well, you're adding the costs of shipping between FFG -> GW. You're adding the cost of extra warehouse space to store, however temporarily, the licensed product. You're adding labour costs for extra workers to unload and divy up the licensed product. You're adding shipping costs to send more product (own and licensed) to their stores.

It may be a direct solution, but it's not necessarily cheap.

But it is "their" product to a great extent. If the customers I deal with are anything to go by, GW will have to have a sign off on everything everyone else does, from RPGs to official t-shirts. That's why they are so hot on not letting fan created content out there if they can help it.

I can understand the wanting to keep to the product they know and does well for them, but I also think what they could win in terms of new customers, extra trade and reputation would be worth it.

'Worth it' requires knowing costs involved and expected revenue. Neither of which we can really know.

The gain is in what I mentioned earlier. New customers, trade and reputation.

The new customers would be people who now find reasons (or excuses) to complain about them and stay away from their shops. I can tell you, if they stocked the boardgames and RPGs, it is likely I would end up buying miniatures. I would probably end up writing reviews about their products and talking about them in my podcast.

I know not everyone does that sort of thing (I am very freaky!) but there would be a lot of people who would end up in their stores.

This sort of marketing, with parallel products, works well in other areas. When you find a collectors edition video game that is exclusive to one retailer, that retailer is selling that product for a lot less margin. Sometimes for next to none. What they gain is the presence, the reputation and the public's attention.

Not an easy thing to quantify, but it is something very, very valuable.

To give another example, take a look at Barnes & Noble with boardgames. Traditionally, it is not their market, yet, they give up floor space to sell something that looks completely unrelated.

The first time someone suggested having a Starbucks in their premises probably a lot of people thought they were mad. Nowadays, it is a pretty common sight.

Can you see why I think they could do a lot better? It might be very different and it might look loopy, but if it works for others, why not for them?

The difference with Barnes & Noble is that the books are not their own. They make a cut of the books they sell, and they make a cut of the boardgames they sell. Either way, they get a cut (likely similar in both cases).

In GW's case, they don't just get a cut of their own products. They get it ALL. 100%. Every penny. Every pence. You're suggesting they give up all that to instead stock something that 1. requires extra costs to get, and 2. earns them less profit, to 3. possibly get some new customers who might buy the moneymakers.

It's not that it couldn't be done. It's just that it's not as clear-cut a benefit as you seem to think. And since it's not a clear-cut benefit, they can't really be faulted for not trying it.

 

[Cor Azer]

I am with you on that one, expect on one point. I have never labeled GW bad. I have said they are not good.

I know it might sound like that means they are bad, but it really doesn't. They are bad at quite a few things, but that is a subject for another thread.

What I really wanted to concentrate was in pointing out that they could be better and do better, not that they are bad.

Sorry to be the pedantic nitpicker, but the first mention of 'bad' and 'GW' in the thread was your response to Transbot.

@Transbot: At least 20 years ago there was a fair selection of comic books. True they were all pretty much Marvel and DC and few else (at least in Spain where I grew up. I really have no idea what it was like in the rest of Europe or the USA), but there were more accessible and comic book shops didn't sell just "Marvel". Imagine there had been the Marvel Shop where only Marvel paraphernalia had been sold and they had, pro-actively, sought to get rid of the rest. That would have been REALLY bad. That's what GW does, alas.

Admittedly, you're calling their action 'bad' as opposed to them, but since it's such a major part of their business, it is nigh-close to calling them 'bad'.

You also, I will note, cast rather dubious honors on them as well. How, exactly, does GW "pro-actively" seek to get rid of the rest?

They produce their own product. They wish to sell said product. Some of it is sold through their own stores. Some of it is sol through other gaming stores. To my knowledge, they place no requirements on these other stores as to what other product they can offer for sale.

I would argue that the reason you don't see Marvel-branded comic book stores is that comic books are horrendously narrow profit margined as it is. The real big money there is in licenses - hence the continued attempts at television shows and movies.

That's not the case in GW's situation. They've had years to build efficiencies into their miniature castings process, and they charge a premium for finished product. They don't have a narrow margin on the models themselves, so they don't need to license out their IP. They do, because some people think they can still make money going that route, but it's such a small part of GW's outlook that spending more money to take advantage of it would negate its benefits.

It does dawn on me though, that since English isn't your mother tongue, that a lot of the venom being spewed your way is due to poor wording.

In my experience, adding 'not' to a word means 'opposite of', and the opposite of 'good' is 'bad'. So most English speakers, upon seeing 'not good' would think 'bad' rather than 'could be better'.

Had you called your piece 'How GW could be better' may have gotten more agreement. I certainly agree. There are plenty of things they could do better (stop hurting my Sisters, please).

I still don't agree with your current premise about selling licensed products making them better though, but that falls back into a matter of taste and risk-assessment.

 

[EmbraCraig]

Every gaming store I've frequented would order the merchandise so they could sell it to me, as long as it's currently in print. That's one sign of a FLGS.

The grocery store I frequent prides itself on ordering items it doesn't normally carry upon customer request.

This is what good stores do. A typical store may not, but this is what I think the OP refers to when labeling GW 'bad' in measures other than pure profit.

True enough, and if you go into a GW store and ask for a GW product that they don't normally carry stock of, you can order it in (although it's a bit fiddly - what you're actually doing it ordering from their website to get delivered to their shop - not really ideal, and not as helpful as I'd like either).

However, if you went in and asked for an RPG, or Privateer Press minis? I'd expect the same response as you get if you went into a branch of New Look and asked them to order a shirt out of H&M, or a PC part from a mac store. Either they'll try to sell you something roughly equivalent that they *do* sell, they'll point you somewhere that does, or you'll get a "Eh... no sorry", with varying degrees of puzzledness/politeness, depending on how on the ball or good at their job they are.

The reason for any shop to be there is to sell. If the reason for a shop to be there is not to sell, then they are being stupid. It is an incredibly expensive way to maintain a presence and there are other ways to do that more cheaply.

That they don't want to go with it is clear, and it is also their prerogative. That I am questioning the judgement behind that decision and deciding to believe that they are wrong is mine. You are welcome to justify what they do, but that doesn't mean that it is the best thing to do.

To be honest, I'm not even really sure that I want to justify what they do too much, I'm just pointing out what GW try to aim for with their stores to give a different viewpoint (Not from fanboyism or anything, just to provide a bit of debate since it's something I know bits about )

I do know plenty of adults who are into GW games who avoid the shops - that's not exactly a ringing endorsement for them... and I really do hope for GW's sake, people in their head office are regularly having these sorts of conversations too.

Coming into a shop to buy product A2, gives the shop the chance to introduce and sell product A1. That is common sense.

Which is the tactic they do use regularly within their own lines - intro games sell starter boxes, which then encourages people to buy more later. What I'm questioning is whether carrying even the 40k RPG lines would really introduce many more sales. I'm not sure it would.

Your expectations and mine are indeed at a par. However I didn't find that politeness that both of us would expect. That, doesn't make a good business. I would never, in a million years, employ someone to be in a shop unless that person is genuinely helpful. If anything because I never go back to a shop where the assistants are not helpful.

I do wonder sometimes about what calibre of applicants GW get for their jobs in the shop. I'd guess the group of people who know the hobby, are happy and able to teach it to new players with enthusiasm, are able to supervise kids sensibly, are actually good at being sales staff, and are willing to work for close to minimum wage are a pretty small group...

Maybe they'd be better aiming for really good retail staff and teaching them how to play games and paint?

 

[Mark CMG]

The regional Games Days and the Battle Bunkers are very cool aspects of their business model.

 

[Leviatham]

NEVAR! Words are all we have! It's what separates man from the animals!

If my cat ever hears you say that, you'll be in serious trouble! It's thumbs that separate him from us!

Being an expert at patronizing (at least, so says my wife), I tend not to assume others do so. Again, idealist.

I always add my reasoning or a justification to my doings or thinking (most of the times, at least). It doesn't always avoid cofusion, but it helps sometimes.

Actually, the first reference I saw to children was, I think, by you (although I'm too lazy to re-read the thread to check. It was actually something that baffled me - I've never seen it as a hobby targeted at kids, seeing as it's far too expensive for $5 allowances (or whatever kids are weedling out of their parents these days). Sure, I've seen some kids at it, but never anywhere near the same level as the college-age crowd.

Actually their targeting techniques is rather clever, I give them that. They provide a safe environment where children enjoy themselves (I consider a child anyone under 16 or 18, depending how immature they are or not). Parents are the ones paying for the toys, and they pay for them because they think their children are participating in an inclusive hobby that makes them happy. They are right.

Also children are the ones who get the presents at Xmas, birthdays and the like. Parents probably wouldn't know where to start if they had to go online shopping, and, having taken my nieces out to the shops, the experience of buying something for a child there and then is something that no website will ever beat!

As mentioned before though, those older crowds buy direct by catalogue or online. They don't need the painting lessons or introductory gametime that the GW shops are really intended to supply. So... there's not really a whole that can be put in stores to draw them in, except possibly more tourneys and game days, which GW does pretty substantially. Still, they've got their ways of purchasing and few are like to change.

Not sure about that. At least in my town, a lot of us older gamers go to get our games at the LFGS because we get to see what we buy and I can ask the owner about the product. I can't say how many more people do that or if that attitude can be extrapolated to other towns/countries, but I still think the traditional shop has a lot to offer.

It was me. I'm really good at the stalking thing.

You are a woman???

That's a taste thing. I love wide open stores, and absolutely detest crowded aisles. My wife and I actually skip the two closest supermarkets to our house because they try to stuff too much into aisles that are already too tight.

And again, since the goal in the stores is teaching play and painting, they need wide open spaces for tables, and to allow for gathered crowds.

Efficiency and overstocking are not the same thing. I run away from sports gear shops. There is one in Brighton that makes me feel claustrophobic, with panic attacks and all. I hate it. I am happy to say that they are a BAD BAD shop!

Re-arranging shelves and using different method of displaying their goods would allow for a greater variety of goods for sale. They woulnd't have to give up on much of their space, just be better at using it, and being more creative at it too!

I'm not denying that it would attract some people, but would those people be enough to cover the profit gap? I just don't believe it, but we'll not get tangible evidence in either direction.

Exactly. We are at an impasse that we cant really solve.

I'll defer to your expertise on shop windows. My experience extends to... looking at them. And I will doubleplusgood your opinion of their advertising.

That said, if it would require advertising to bring in a new demographic, I would prefer them invest that amount instead at improving their current demographic.

Shop windows are quite a secret art. Next time you, or your wife, stop to look at a shop window, think if what you stopped to look at was something you are actually interested in, or just something interesting. When you stop in front of a shop window, other people see you stopping and will feel curiosity. Some will come close, some will walk by, but the effect is there.

Not sure they would require more advertising. Again the companies that produce their licenses products do that already, so little else would be needed.

Having said that, they could do with some proper marketing campaigns!

Wow... a cynic who thinks he's an idealist... that's some idealistic thinking, my friend

Yep... I'm a paradox!

Well, there are too things going on here. I said that I assume general competency in one's area of expertise, true. My experience, however, is that many corporations don't leave people in their area of expertise. The Peter Principle.

I work in government, IT specifically. There are plenty of excellent programmers, designers, etc... Very few of them have any real management skills. I dread them being promoted up the chain.

So now imagine what their areas of competency are in GW.... and how competent they might be...

Then I'm glad to be an enabler

Civility? For hells no... Bring on the tar!

You are, indeed an enabler. If you were a troll you wouldn't be, but you're actually quite easy to get along with!

I wouldn't bring the tar on you.. I am getting to like you!

You can't just say 'GW sells games'. The sell miniatures; they're the moneymakers. The games are just a means to spur people into selecting which miniatures to buy. The licensed products don't really drive miniature sales. You don't need miniatures at all with the licensed video games, and, excepting the GM, players may or may not buy one model.

Alas, but I'm too unfamiliar with the photo industry to think of a comparable.

I can't see the benefits being as huge as you think, and the costs would be greater than you seem to project.

Same difference, really. Without the games,the miniatures would be pointless. Again, the licensed products would be just another way to attract customers. It would be bait, really.

This how it worked for me in the photography business. I run a shop and a studio. One of the windows was used to display photographs from our weddings and studio portraiture. I became the photographer for the concert hall in my town and had the privilege of photographing some great bands. I decided to take 1/2 of that window and 1/2 of the other and display some of the photos I took at the concert. People actually started to buy them. Soon after, other photographers asked me if I would sell photos they were taking at flamenco festivals and other music events. I said yes and displayed side by side with mine. I didn't say they were taken by other people until people asked. I just showed photos.

Young and not so young people could come to the shop and ask how I took the photos, I showed them. Many bought cameras. Most came back to have their films processed.

I think if the same formula were applied to GW games and miniatures, something similar could happen.

Well, you're adding the costs of shipping between FFG -> GW. You're adding the cost of extra warehouse space to store, however temporarily, the licensed product. You're adding labour costs for extra workers to unload and divy up the licensed product. You're adding shipping costs to send more product (own and licensed) to their stores.

It may be a direct solution, but it's not necessarily cheap.[/QUOTE

The cost of shipping from FFG are already there. They have to ship to their distributors already. The extra space, considering how small it would be in comparison with the proportion of their product with the licensed games would be very small. Labour would pretty much be the same. Creating more jobs would make them a better business in my book!

And as for cheap... neither are their products. I doubt it would have a massive impact, if any at all!

'Worth it' requires knowing costs involved and expected revenue. Neither of which we can really know.

Requires knowing? You're now asking me to know things?

The difference with Barnes & Noble is that the books are not their own. They make a cut of the books they sell, and they make a cut of the boardgames they sell. Either way, they get a cut (likely similar in both cases).

In GW's case, they don't just get a cut of their own products. They get it ALL. 100%. Every penny. Every pence. You're suggesting they give up all that to instead stock something that 1. requires extra costs to get, and 2. earns them less profit, to 3. possibly get some new customers who might buy the moneymakers.

It's not that it couldn't be done. It's just that it's not as clear-cut a benefit as you seem to think. And since it's not a clear-cut benefit, they can't really be faulted for not trying it.

The point with B&N is not that they carry their own products or not, but that they gave up on their traditional business to try something new and different that would attract, either new customers, or the same customers more often.

That is where we reach another impasse. I think it would be a pretty good benefit, it might not be clear-cut and it will never be until it's tried, but the fact that they've not tried (to my knowledge. I could be wrong) is what I question.

 

[Leviatham]

True enough, and if you go into a GW store and ask for a GW product that they don't normally carry stock of, you can order it in (although it's a bit fiddly - what you're actually doing it ordering from their website to get delivered to their shop - not really ideal, and not as helpful as I'd like either).

However, if you went in and asked for an RPG, or Privateer Press minis? I'd expect the same response as you get if you went into a branch of New Look and asked them to order a shirt out of H&M, or a PC part from a mac store. Either they'll try to sell you something roughly equivalent that they *do* sell, they'll point you somewhere that does, or you'll get a "Eh... no sorry", with varying degrees of puzzledness/politeness, depending on how on the ball or good at their job they are.

Except that, as I have said in previous posts, I am only advocating for GW branded products, not Privateer Press or Pathfinder products, or any other.

To be honest, I'm not even really sure that I want to justify what they do too much, I'm just pointing out what GW try to aim for with their stores to give a different viewpoint (Not from fanboyism or anything, just to provide a bit of debate since it's something I know bits about )

I do know plenty of adults who are into GW games who avoid the shops - that's not exactly a ringing endorsement for them... and I really do hope for GW's sake, people in their head office are regularly having these sorts of conversations too.

That's fair enough. I understand the debate bit!

I bet they fire anyone in their office who has this sort of conversation... they probably don't take dissension very well! LOL

Which is the tactic they do use regularly within their own lines - intro games sell starter boxes, which then encourages people to buy more later. What I'm questioning is whether carrying even the 40k RPG lines would really introduce many more sales. I'm not sure it would.

That's what would need to be tested to be found out. I know the power of impulse buy. My husband has got accustomed about it and now he asks me "Shall I make some space in the loft for when you come back with whatever it is you won't be able to avoid buying?"

I do wonder sometimes about what calibre of applicants GW get for their jobs in the shop. I'd guess the group of people who know the hobby, are happy and able to teach it to new players with enthusiasm, are able to supervise kids sensibly, are actually good at being sales staff, and are willing to work for close to minimum wage are a pretty small group...

Maybe they'd be better aiming for really good retail staff and teaching them how to play games and paint?

Actually, I am going to say something for the staff on the GW shops: They are very passionate about GW. Either that or the initiation rituals must be incredible!

Seriously though. GW's shops staff tend to really be into the games. If you ask them about their games or ask for anything related to GW, they can't do enough for you. They become proficient painters, memorise catalogues and have no problem looking after the kids.

What they lack is proper training and what they have is excessive pressure to meet targets.

Also, considering how much unemployment is out there, I think they would probably get enough candidates to be able to afford quite a lot of good people!

 

[Leviatham]

Sorry to be the pedantic nitpicker, but the first mention of 'bad' and 'GW' in the thread was your response to Transbot.

Admittedly, you're calling their action 'bad' as opposed to them, but since it's such a major part of their business, it is nigh-close to calling them 'bad'.

You also, I will note, cast rather dubious honors on them as well. How, exactly, does GW "pro-actively" seek to get rid of the rest?

Uhmm... it might come close, but I still wouldn't call them bad. I would say some of the things they do are bad. I'll talk to my friend next Saturday and ask him which ones to make sure I get them right.

OH, what I meant with that is how they pro-actively cast away any other games products from their shops. However, many a lawsuit have been issued from GW against companies that they claimed were producing miniatures that they considered to be too close to theirs. I know it can be argued that they were in their right (I am not denying that) but it does indeed mean they make the hell of an effort to make sure no one comes even close to them.

They produce their own product. They wish to sell said product. Some of it is sold through their own stores. Some of it is sol through other gaming stores. To my knowledge, they place no requirements on these other stores as to what other product they can offer for sale.

Err... no.. they don't do that as far as I know. That would probably be illegal or something like that. I would make it illegal!

I would argue that the reason you don't see Marvel-branded comic book stores is that comic books are horrendously narrow profit margined as it is. The real big money there is in licenses - hence the continued attempts at television shows and movies.

True. Also comic shops make a very narrow profit out of many brands, which helps them bulk up sales and make a living (just... I have never met a rich comic book shop owner).

That's not the case in GW's situation. They've had years to build efficiencies into their miniature castings process, and they charge a premium for finished product. They don't have a narrow margin on the models themselves, so they don't need to license out their IP. They do, because some people think they can still make money going that route, but it's such a small part of GW's outlook that spending more money to take advantage of it would negate its benefits.[/QUOTE}

Indeed, and they do make money, otherwise FFG wouldn't bother with their boardgames and there would be no comic books and no videogames (mediocre as they might be).

I don't really know about what margins they have, but I bet that they're narrow compared with the margin their own product yields.

It does dawn on me though, that since English isn't your mother tongue, that a lot of the venom being spewed your way is due to poor wording.

Poor wording? Oh no!

Poor tone maybe, but wording? Sir, I will tell you I make the hell of an effort to use tons of words and make sure the spell checker becomes a palliative for my dyslexia!

Poor wording... pah!

In my experience, adding 'not' to a word means 'opposite of', and the opposite of 'good' is 'bad'. So most English speakers, upon seeing 'not good' would think 'bad' rather than 'could be better'.

You know, that is actually true. I remember when I arrived to the UK and I asked people "How are you doing?" and people would say "Not bad". I would immediately get worried and as "You aren't well? What's wrong?".

Later on (as in 9 years ago and a few times a year ever since) when I trained as a counsellor, I learned that what one doesn't say is as important as what one does, sometimes even more. I also learned to take words in a very abstract way. Thus not-good doesn't mean bad to me. It just means is not good, or that it could be better.

To that I have to add that I am quite abrasive, I do like to call a spade a spade, sometimes even a shovel, so it makes for a very weird combination in which I am too blunt with my words and struggle to actually say everything I mean!

Had you called your piece 'How GW could be better' may have gotten more agreement. I certainly agree. There are plenty of things they could do better (stop hurting my Sisters, please).

If I had called my thread that, we wouldn't have had over a 1000 views and nearly 100 posts. Let's face it, we're very opinionated and we love to get into this things. Some people get all trollish and complain for the sake of complaining, some others do it because we enjoy it, like you and I, and some do it because they actually know about it and can put anyone wrong rightly so, like Matthew!

I still don't agree with your current premise about selling licensed products making them better though, but that falls back into a matter of taste and risk-assessment.

Well Sir, I call stalemate!

 

[Cor Azer]

If my cat ever hears you say that, you'll be in serious trouble! It's thumbs that separate him from us!

Ha! Wretched cat. My friend's little devil doesn't need thumbs! It's like some sort of Spider-cat that clings to the underside of the staircase ready to strike at exposed ankles.

I always add my reasoning or a justification to my doings or thinking (most of the times, at least). It doesn't always avoid cofusion, but it helps sometimes.

I doubt most people would want to see my chains of thought

Actually their targeting techniques is rather clever, I give them that. They provide a safe environment where children enjoy themselves (I consider a child anyone under 16 or 18, depending how immature they are or not). Parents are the ones paying for the toys, and they pay for them because they think their children are participating in an inclusive hobby that makes them happy. They are right.

Also children are the ones who get the presents at Xmas, birthdays and the like. Parents probably wouldn't know where to start if they had to go online shopping, and, having taken my nieces out to the shops, the experience of buying something for a child there and then is something that no website will ever beat!

Ah... another distinction conflict due to language. I would never have considered a teenager a 'child'. A 'minor' perhaps, but I leave 'child' for those under 10.

But yes, targeting the kids of 'clueless' parents is always an excellent marketing strategy - get the disposable income and the lack of willpower and discipline in one neat little package.

Not sure about that. At least in my town, a lot of us older gamers go to get our games at the LFGS because we get to see what we buy and I can ask the owner about the product. I can't say how many more people do that or if that attitude can be extrapolated to other towns/countries, but I still think the traditional shop has a lot to offer.

I do that occasionally, but note that purchased GW miniatures is a bit different than RPG purchases. Unless you're constantly switching factions, you start by buying the faction's main army book and then the core models for your army. Beyond that, you pretty much stick to the figures for that army, and the vast majority of those are technically advertised to you in that core army rule book you started with.

You are a woman???

Some days.

On occasion I'm also an elf, a robot, an Elder abomination, and at least one time, a tree.

Efficiency and overstocking are not the same thing. I run away from sports gear shops. There is one in Brighton that makes me feel claustrophobic, with panic attacks and all. I hate it. I am happy to say that they are a BAD BAD shop!

Re-arranging shelves and using different method of displaying their goods would allow for a greater variety of goods for sale. They woulnd't have to give up on much of their space, just be better at using it, and being more creative at it too!

Any specifics? Again, shop organization isn't my specialty, but if the walls are already full and the floor space is reserved for game tables... where exactly is the extra product to go?

Exactly. We are at an impasse that we cant really solve.

Gordian knot solution!

Shop windows are quite a secret art. Next time you, or your wife, stop to look at a shop window, think if what you stopped to look at was something you are actually interested in, or just something interesting. When you stop in front of a shop window, other people see you stopping and will feel curiosity. Some will come close, some will walk by, but the effect is there.

Not sure they would require more advertising. Again the companies that produce their licenses products do that already, so little else would be needed.

Having said that, they could do with some proper marketing campaigns!

You know, I never really thought about the gawker effect of seeing other people staring at shop windows. Interesting...

So now imagine what their areas of competency are in GW.... and how competent they might be...

My understanding is that there is a pub (Bugman's) in the main GW office. I would imagine that has a bigger impact on their competency than promoting too high.

You are, indeed an enabler. If you were a troll you wouldn't be, but you're actually quite easy to get along with!

I wouldn't bring the tar on you.. I am getting to like you!

Kill 'em with kindness.

Same difference, really. Without the games,the miniatures would be pointless. Again, the licensed products would be just another way to attract customers. It would be bait, really.

This how it worked for me in the photography business. I run a shop and a studio. One of the windows was used to display photographs from our weddings and studio portraiture. I became the photographer for the concert hall in my town and had the privilege of photographing some great bands. I decided to take 1/2 of that window and 1/2 of the other and display some of the photos I took at the concert. People actually started to buy them. Soon after, other photographers asked me if I would sell photos they were taking at flamenco festivals and other music events. I said yes and displayed side by side with mine. I didn't say they were taken by other people until people asked. I just showed photos.

Young and not so young people could come to the shop and ask how I took the photos, I showed them. Many bought cameras. Most came back to have their films processed.

I think if the same formula were applied to GW games and miniatures, something similar could happen.

Well with the painting and intro game lessons, they already do that good service stuff; you're mainly just suggesting the licensed product addition part.

The cost of shipping from FFG are already there. They have to ship to their distributors already. The extra space, considering how small it would be in comparison with the proportion of their product with the licensed games would be very small. Labour would pretty much be the same. Creating more jobs would make them a better business in my book!

And as for cheap... neither are their products. I doubt it would have a massive impact, if any at all!

While creating more jobs is certainly a boon for the local economy, good (as in well-run) businesses need to be mindful of costs.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'The cost of shipping from FFG are already there.' It's not. As in, currently GW is paying nothing for that, because it isn't done. If FFG was to ship to GW, then there would be an added cost.

Requires knowing? You're now asking me to know things?

Knowing is half the battle. Yo joe!

The point with B&N is not that they carry their own products or not, but that they gave up on their traditional business to try something new and different that would attract, either new customers, or the same customers more often.

That is where we reach another impasse. I think it would be a pretty good benefit, it might not be clear-cut and it will never be until it's tried, but the fact that they've not tried (to my knowledge. I could be wrong) is what I question.

I really don't think you're appreciating the difference between a retailer like B&N that stocks other companies' products and gets only a fraction of the profit vs a store like GW that stocks their own product and gets all of the profit. That really is a huge difference.

It's relatively easy for a generic retailer to swap one product for another as long as they're getting roughly the same percentage of the profit. It is decidedly different to go from 100% of the profit to a small fraction GW would get from a licensed product.

 

[Cor Azer]

Uhmm... it might come close, but I still wouldn't call them bad. I would say some of the things they do are bad. I'll talk to my friend next Saturday and ask him which ones to make sure I get them right.

OH, what I meant with that is how they pro-actively cast away any other games products from their shops. However, many a lawsuit have been issued from GW against companies that they claimed were producing miniatures that they considered to be too close to theirs. I know it can be argued that they were in their right (I am not denying that) but it does indeed mean they make the hell of an effort to make sure no one comes even close to them.

It may be an English mother-tongue vs not issue, but I wouldn't say deciding not to stock any non-GW product in their stores 'pro-actively casting it away'. It's not like they fire off an email to other gaming companies and say, 'By the way, that new RPG line you're making. We won't stock it.' They won't stock it, but that's because they decided to focus on their own stuff.

But yeah, from everything I've heard, they are litigious bastards when their IP is at stake.

Err... no.. they don't do that as far as I know. That would probably be illegal or something like that. I would make it illegal!

It wouldn't be illegal, and shouldn't be, but if that clause were included, I would suspect the licensing fee they asked would be heavily reduced.

Point of interest in a similar note - I'm told the license GW has for the Lord of the Rings movies doesn't allow them to have LotR models displayed next to their own Warhammer Fantasy models so that there's no risk of confusion in IP. Separate display cases and shelving required.

The fact that they got nailed with such a clause is why I don't think their licensing lawyers are so wicked hot that they're getting a killing on licensing out their own IP.

True. Also comic shops make a very narrow profit out of many brands, which helps them bulk up sales and make a living (just... I have never met a rich comic book shop owner).

I have met one. He was just opening his shop.

He's not one anymore.

Indeed, and they do make money, otherwise FFG wouldn't bother with their boardgames and there would be no comic books and no videogames (mediocre as they might be).

I don't really know about what margins they have, but I bet that they're narrow compared with the margin their own product yields.

Yup

Poor wording? Oh no!

Poor tone maybe, but wording? Sir, I will tell you I make the hell of an effort to use tons of words and make sure the spell checker becomes a palliative for my dyslexia!

Poor wording... pah!

Kill 'em with vocabulary.

You know, that is actually true. I remember when I arrived to the UK and I asked people "How are you doing?" and people would say "Not bad". I would immediately get worried and as "You aren't well? What's wrong?".

Later on (as in 9 years ago and a few times a year ever since) when I trained as a counsellor, I learned that what one doesn't say is as important as what one does, sometimes even more. I also learned to take words in a very abstract way. Thus not-good doesn't mean bad to me. It just means is not good, or that it could be better.

To that I have to add that I am quite abrasive, I do like to call a spade a spade, sometimes even a shovel, so it makes for a very weird combination in which I am too blunt with my words and struggle to actually say everything I mean!

Yup. I get nailed with such misunderstandings often from my wife, who grew up in a different part of Canada with different slang. I'll call her meals 'not bad' or 'pretty good' - both of which mean I like them 'cause they're good. Instead, she hears 'it could be worse, but it's not great' and 'but it could be better.'

Language is a funny thing.

If I had called my thread that, we wouldn't have had over a 1000 views and nearly 100 posts. Let's face it, we're very opinionated and we love to get into this things. Some people get all trollish and complain for the sake of complaining, some others do it because we enjoy it, like you and I, and some do it because they actually know about it and can put anyone wrong rightly so, like Matthew!

xkcd: Duty Calls

Well Sir, I call stalemate!

Well played.