Why Games Workshop is not a good business

[MGibster]

If the answer to that weren't so obvious I would answer it.

In another post you claimed to write the article in an attempt to foster discussion. Do you really think the above statement demonstrates an honest attempt at discussion? I don't.

And some act as such.

You made a sweeping and insulting generalization about GW fans. Quite frankly, you should apologize for it.

And you truly believe that $20 of today are as valuable as $15 from 10 years ago? Also, do you really believe that it costs the same to produce? Because I don't.

Yes, I truly believe $20 of today has the same purchasing power as $15 in 2000. Why wouldn't I believe the United States Department of Labor? Do you have a more reliable source of data? Do I believe it costs the same to produce? I don't know. I don't know how much it costs to produce a GW mini. Neither do you.

Actually, GW is not the only company out there who does miniatures. There are companies out there, much smaller, selling much better miniatures at similar prices. I'm sure it wouldn't take you any time at all to find some.

Did I claim GW was the only company out there selling miniatures? No, I did not. I simply compared them to other companies selling similar products that no longer exist. You choose not to address that point for some reason and instead focus on some strawman of your own creation.

That's fine. Also, as I have said several times before, I wasn't trying to back anything up, just convey my opinion. I didn't provide any "facts" just observations that are unverifiable. You're welcome to take them or leave them.

This is patently false. Your thesis statement was that GW was not a good business. You followed that up by spending a few paragraphs providing supporting evidence for your thesis statement that GW was not a good business. Furthermore, you made actual factual statements. You claim that their profit margin was 2000%. Even though you concede that the profit margin might be a bit different, that was a factual statement and not an opinion.

Opinions don't have to be substantiated to be valid, or to be expressed. To be allowed and able to express them is our right, though, and I love exercising it.

Some opinions don't need to be substantiated to be valid. "I think lobster tastes bad" is one such opinion. I might think lobster is the best tasting thing to come out of the ocean but that doesn't make the lobster hating opinion any less valid. Just baffling. You yourself recognize that some opinions need to be substantiated to be valid. Which is why you went through all the trouble of supporting your thesis statement that GW was a bad business.

Ultimately, you don't get to hide behind "It's just my opinion" as if where a shield to protect your written work from criticism. You made some arguments in favor of your position and others have attacked those arguments. That's how a dialogue works. You are interested in fostering a dialogue, right? Or do you only want people to agree with you?

 

[Leviatham]

Ultimately, you don't get to hide behind "It's just my opinion" as if where a shield to protect your written work from criticism. You made some arguments in favor of your position and others have attacked those arguments. That's how a dialogue works. You are interested in fostering a dialogue, right? Or do you only want people to agree with you?

I will only reply to your last paragraph. Main reason is the one that I found the most interesting. Also because I need to finish a few things at home and I really don't have as long as I'd like.

I am more than happy to criticism. I haven't shied away from it and I haven't complained about it. In fact I have accepted it (quite graciously) and engaged with it. By association I have done the same with the people who have thrown it my way. Not sure what else I have to do to prove that I am not just wanting to hear, or prepared to converse, exclusively with those who agree with me.

However what I am finding interesting (and I mean this genuinely. It is very interesting) is that you guys have been at my throat for the way I write, but at no point, whatsoever, have you tried to provide with any evidence that what I am saying is incorrect. You're simply discrediting what I have said and my opinion based on how badly substantiated it is.

Could we focus on *what* I wrote and now *how* I wrote it or what I *should* write?

So... if you think GW is a good business, please explain why.

If you just don't like my article, well... don't worry, there will be more to come. Hopefully next time you'll like it better!

 

[Leviatham]

Btw, I just saw the Texas tornado in the news. I know this is a tangent to this conversation, but I do hope you guys are safe.

A friend of mine lost his house last year during the tornado season and I know it can be horrible. Hope it doesn't happen to anyone this year, though I realise that's just wishful thinking.

For the cynical ones amongst you, I am not attempting to get into anyone's good side. I really worry about this sort of situations.

 

[MGibster]

If you just don't like my article, well... don't worry, there will be more to come. Hopefully next time you'll like it better!

I and others have directly addressed the points you made in your article. Of my arguments, you specifically went out of your way not to answer one of my questions and you have replied with nonsense to others. Quite frankly, I don't know whether or not you're genuinely incapable of engaging in a meaningful dialogue with others or you're just messing with us for the fun of it. Either way, I'm done.

Good luck, everyone else who sticks around.

 

[Leviatham]

I and others have directly addressed the points you made in your article. Of my arguments, you specifically went out of your way not to answer one of my questions and you have replied with nonsense to others. Quite frankly, I don't know whether or not you're genuinely incapable of engaging in a meaningful dialogue with others or you're just messing with us for the fun of it. Either way, I'm done.

Good luck, everyone else who sticks around.

Oh well, to reply to your questions about who they should address:

Everyone else they're not addressing so far.

Did that really need a reply? Because it was pretty obvious to me.

As for the "nonsense"... please point it out. I think we've established in this thread that this sort of claims should be substantiated!

 

[Deset Gled]

...at no point, whatsoever, have you tried to provide with any evidence that what I am saying is incorrect. You're simply discrediting what I have said and my opinion based on how badly substantiated it is.

Could we focus on *what* I wrote and now *how* I wrote it or what I *should* write?

*What* you are saying is nothing but a badly substantiated opinion. You have offered very little in the way of a debate, thus, there is very little to try and refute. But I'll try.

Your starting premise is this:

So, for the sake of clarity, I will point out that I do not consider profit to be the reflection of good business. Good business, in my book, is when any company makes the most from and for its market, not just its product. Also is when a company reaches to the widest possible demographic successfully.

You have not offered any evidence in your piece to claim GW fails to do this. Your actually failed immediately after this point because you completely and utterly failed to define GWs market. So, I'll do it for you: GW makes wargames, with a focus on miniatures. And they actually hold a darn good percentage of that market. They are not an RPG company, they are not a board game company, and they are not a media outlet. None of the rest of your article addresses failure of the company to expand in the wargames market. As a result, you have made no logical points to support your thesis.

It seems like most of your arguments about why GW is not a good company are focused on things they should be selling *other* than wargames. This is not only contrary to your starting point, but actually provides evidence to undermine your base assumption.

You see, the reason why GW manages to be successful (profit-wise) is that they are a vertical organization. GW manufactures their own minis, distributes them within their company, and sells through their own exclusive stores. They maximize profit by controlling the complete chain from production to consumer. Conversely, what you have described about expanding the target market and reaching a wider demographic is the business model of a horizontal organization. That is, they make a product that can be used by the largest possible audience, but must rely on an external network for sales and distribution.

You cannot simply state that horizontal growth is good and vertical growth is bad. Both have their pros an cons, but trying to claim one is right and one is wrong just shows a blatant misunderstanding of basic business concepts.

 

[Leviatham]

*What* you are saying is nothing but a badly substantiated opinion. You have offered very little in the way of a debate, thus, there is very little to try and refute. But I'll try.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I would say that the many posts that are present in this thread are more than enough debate. As to how I have offered little in the way of debate considering how I have engaged in this conversation, you'll have to explain that to me.

Your starting premise is this:

You have not offered any evidence in your piece to claim GW fails to do this. Your actually failed immediately after this point because you completely and utterly failed to define GWs market. So, I'll do it for you: GW makes wargames, with a focus on miniatures. And they actually hold a darn good percentage of that market. They are not an RPG company, they are not a board game company, and they are not a media outlet. None of the rest of your article addresses failure of the company to expand in the wargames market. As a result, you have made no logical points to support your thesis.

About me not defining what market I fell they should approach. That is simply, not true. I very clearly state that I think they should support other GW products with their name on it. That includes RPGs and Boardgames. How is that failing to define their market?

Also, they do create boardgames (Space Hulk and Dreadfleet) so, although in a small way, they are indeed a board game company.

My point is that they don't support those products as I feel they should, specially the RPGs.

As for they are not a media outlet. I would argue that White Dwarf and the many novels published under the Warhammer brand are indeed media outlets. Not to mention the videogames.

To say that they are just a wargames company it's extremely removed from reality.

It seems like most of your arguments about why GW is not a good company are focused on things they should be selling *other* than wargames. This is not only contrary to your starting point, but actually provides evidence to undermine your base assumption.

How? I really can't see the logic or reasoning in what you say there.

You see, the reason why GW manages to be successful (profit-wise) is that they are a vertical organization. GW manufactures their own minis, distributes them within their company, and sells through their own exclusive stores. They maximize profit by controlling the complete chain from production to consumer. Conversely, what you have described about expanding the target market and reaching a wider demographic is the business model of a horizontal organization. That is, they make a product that can be used by the largest possible audience, but must rely on an external network for sales and distribution.

And they don't do that by licensing the Warhammer RPGS and board games to Fantasy Flight? As to having to rely on an external network for sales and distribution. They already have a network for sales and distribution. They don't have to rely in another, just use the one they already have.

You cannot simply state that horizontal growth is good and vertical growth is bad. Both have their pros an cons, but trying to claim one is right and one is wrong just shows a blatant misunderstanding of basic business concepts.

I haven't stated that vertical growth is bad. I have stated that, in my opinion, horizontal growth would be better. I haven't said that one is right or wrong either, those are your words, not mine. I have said good, not good, and better, very different things.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

When I went for the last time (ever!) to my "not so friendly local Games Workshop store" 3 years ago, I was with a friend who wanted to buy something. I was just looking. A shop "assistant" saw me. Came to me and asked me if I was interested in something. "I'm just waiting for my friend, he's buying something" I replied. He, literally, turned around without another word and went back to painting.

No, "what is he buying?", "Oh, you don't play, how come?", or even "have you ever played or are interested in miniatures? I could show you how to put them together, you don't have to play to be into GW".

Hang on a second; he asked you if you were interested in something, you said no, he didn't hound you into buying something, yet somehow you took offense and decided never to go back? If you were interested enough to have that negative a reaction, why not actually give him a straight answer when he asked you in the first place? The only lapse in customer service that I dislike more than being ignored, is being hounded after saying I don't need any help. He did the right thing. Your reaction is unreasonable.

 

[Alan Shutko]

The only lapse in customer service that I dislike more than being ignored, is being hounded after saying I don't need any help. He did the right thing. Your reaction is unreasonable.

I almost entirely agree with you. From the stated situation, I think an improvement could be made if the associate said something like "Great! If you have any questions, let me know."

It's a subtle difference, but I could see someone interpreting the described behavior as the associate turning his back on you since you don't matter, as opposed to giving you space but letting you know that he's there if you change his mind (but that he won't bug you if you don't).

 

[Leviatham]

Hang on a second; he asked you if you were interested in something, you said no, he didn't hound you into buying something, yet somehow you took offense and decided never to go back? If you were interested enough to have that negative a reaction, why not actually give him a straight answer when he asked you in the first place? The only lapse in customer service that I dislike more than being ignored, is being hounded after saying I don't need any help. He did the right thing. Your reaction is unreasonable.

Why could I ever take offence at someone turning his back on me in a shop?

That is not just poor customer service, it is also bad manners.

I have worked in retail in the past. The company I currently work for has a very strict customer satisfaction guidelines that we put in place to make sure we do all we can to satisfy our customers. I wouldn’t dream of turning my back and not saying even goodbye or a simple “If there is anything you’d like to see let me know”.

Also, just because you work in a shop, it doesn’t mean all the interaction with people in the shop HAS to be to sell. If all you’re doing is painting a miniature, you should spend a few minutes just making chatter with the person. I would be only so happy to hear about their games if I didn’t feel they’re trying to sell me. If he had told me something in the lines of “no worries. I’m painting a few miniatures, have you ever tried?”, that man would have had a customer because that would probably interest me.

When is about retail, I am not easy to please. When is about a retail with the margins of GW and the profits they make, I expect they make an effort to gain and please customers