2016 Financial Report

This is for all your Warhammer talk

Moderator: Keepers of the Peace

Backgammon
Posts: 511
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Montreal, Canada

2016 Financial Report

Postby Backgammon » Mon Aug 01, 2016 5:23 pm

Been waiting on this. You can read for yourself here: http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-c ... t-page.pdf

Some highlights:
* Revenue and sales are down
- Mail Order (which included online ordering) is down by a whopping 12%.
- I interestingly Forge World sales are up 28%
* Licensing revenue is SUPER up, obviously cause of stuff like Vermintide and Total War

* The leadership faced an attack by investors trying to get rid of them. Seems to be about salaries being too high. For those interested, Kevin Roundtree makes 402 000 GBP per year. I think the revolt is probably also about investors rebelling about decisions being made. In any case, they survived the attack.
* They claim AoS sales are higher than Warhammer sales have been for many years
* Sales tanked in December but say they recovered after that
* They are diversifying into many different, smaller scale game lines

* Strategies for this year are:
- Open more stores
- Mix up what stores carry what minis (i.e. some stores will focus on "introduction ranges"
- Increase sales through 3rd party stores
- Review the product range, introduce several new games

SuperRabbit
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:33 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby SuperRabbit » Sat Aug 06, 2016 6:25 pm

good summary! It wasn't a terrible result imo... Recent falls in the value of the pound should help international sales too, which is where the majority of GW sales seem to be.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Mon Aug 08, 2016 12:12 am

Considering the attempted hard selling I got in Tottenham court Road today when i just went in for a couple of paints this really doesn't seem that surprising, thankg god for total war I guess. The attack on leadership is very interesting, its long overdue and I suspect if things don't improve we are going to see another attack. (maybe They'll hire some people from CA :lol: )

http://www.iii.co.uk/articles/344389/ca ... s-workshop

This is always an interesting read from one of the actual investors.

SuperRabbit
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:33 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby SuperRabbit » Mon Aug 08, 2016 4:31 pm

the hard sell is what the shop staff are employed for, its awkward & clumsy sometimes but thats retail - its a grin & bear it set-up. Personally, I feel newly optimistic looking forward - AOS has beat expectations, total war is a great short term boost and there'll be more IP licensing projects in the pipeline. (DOW III?) and HH novels go straight to best-seller lists.
Long-term - they're doomed of course, (product too expensive to indoctrinate the next wave of young enthusiasts) but short term they continue to muddle along and management continue to survive - they're doing no worse than many other toy companies out there.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Mon Aug 08, 2016 4:44 pm

How has AoS beat expectations? pre-royalties are down by about £4,000,000! Are the expectations really that low?

SuperRabbit
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:33 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby SuperRabbit » Mon Aug 08, 2016 6:58 pm

Logan054 wrote:Are the expectations really that low?

yup!

Fantasy wasn't selling, AOS outsold fantasy. Growth will take time, new shoots etc. Its not like pokemon, they're trying to build up a whole new IP. I'd be inclined to wait and see how it develops.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Tue Aug 09, 2016 6:53 am

Do you have any actual figures to backup that claim? from I'm reading sales are down from last year, that's also taking into account that royalties have quadrupled and forgeworld is up 28%. I really can't see how AoS is outselling anything.

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Nibbles » Tue Aug 09, 2016 1:21 pm

I can imagine AoS outselling 8th when looking at, let's say the two last years of it. But the first year of 8th was probably a lot better than what AoS has had.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Tue Aug 09, 2016 3:10 pm

TBH mate I'm just not seeing how it's doing better, the only way it's doing better if people literally have stopped buying space marines. I really doubt it when upu consider forgeworld makes a business selling expensive space marines.

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Nibbles » Tue Aug 09, 2016 7:36 pm

Logan054 wrote:TBH mate I'm just not seeing how it's doing better, the only way it's doing better if people literally have stopped buying space marines. I really doubt it when upu consider forgeworld makes a business selling expensive space marines.


It's not doing better on overall, of that I'm sure. While the player base seems to be growing now, it is still lesser than what 8th had in its prime. But it could definitely be doing better at this point than 8th was during its final years.

I think we can even look at the AoS as having released in beta form, with its proper launch happening with the release of the General's Handbook. The original launch of the product did feel quite rushed and incomplete, seeing how bare-boned it indeed was.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Lord of Pleasure
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:54 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Lord of Pleasure » Wed Aug 10, 2016 12:35 pm

And obviously there are people that may be purchasing some GW models still for use with other systems. So AOS's success might not be all for AoS. Not that GW will care too much though as it's still money in the bank.

What will be interesting to see is how the trend over time forms from them making their stuff less generic fantasy and most specific to the AoS universe.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Wed Aug 10, 2016 2:15 pm

75hastings69 wrote:
AoS is selling worse than WFB did, it's popularity is much lower, if GW don't reach out and get someone to start buying/playing do you think GW will support AoS for very long if it is actually making them less money than WFB did???


That's what this 3 ways to play is all about, they have got to try and appeal to a bigger market, because the market they selected (picked at random) is not spending enough money. Hence the very very early warning to sharholders despite having 2 very popular launches (BaC and DW:O) AND some well received 40k releases..... this should at least be some kind of indication of how much AoS tanked even for the most ardent fan of it.



By the way for those asking I do not have information on how other products sold or why this or why that, I will happily share with you all the two things I was implicitly told:-

1/ WFB was still making profit before end times, just not as much as some people would have liked. This is kind of ironic because IMO the reasons it didn't make more profit is it was largely put on the back burners behind anything that had power armour (i.e. space marines/40k) - and I guess because of popularity that is understandable. And the cost of entry. However the making cost of entry so high is directly the fault of GW, the costs per army towards the end of WFB were beyond crazy, a small unit (one of many in an army) costing between 50 -100gbp is just crazy when there are so many alternatives out there. What is even more unforgiveable and moronic is that there would have been an easier fix to boost sales of WFB, release an entry level/skirmish game, get people buying the very same models you already sell for WFB but in smaller numbers, you've already paid for the development so any extra sales add to profit. Then once people have built a small force under skirmish rules let them add to it for the main WFB, they'll have spent the same amount of money (if not a little more when you take into account the cost of the skirmish game) but it wouldn't be in one big stupid hit!

2/ Sales of AoS are poor, and it doesn't have a strong sales/customer base anywhere world wide. In some countries it is all but dead already, in others there is a small and slowly growing community, however these are not near the levels WFB had before it was decided to be scrapped (and this means sales BEFORE end times spike). The reception of the game from the wider community has been overwhelmingly negative, from the ruleset, to the background material.


I believe this is something hasting was saying about AoS sales. Given how much the sales from the core business are down, I actually doubt it's even doing better than what 8th was doing towards then end. As I said before, the only way AoS is doing better is if people have stopped buying space marines. Given we just had that plastic 30k stuff, I'm going to guess that the 30k box set did really well, hence why they decided to release the units individually.

Honestly nibbles, i think you're being a bit optimistic on how well AoS is doing, if it really was doing better than 8th, I'm pretty sure they'd release some figure to show them they made the right call with AoS.

I don't even think AoS was beta, more like alpha, i think they could put the minimal effort into the rules as they truly believed most of its customers simply buy the models to paint. Sales went down because a painter doesn't need to buy 5000 spacemarines, a hobbyist who paints and plays who likes the fluff on the other hand is more likely to buy a couple of companies of marines so he can recreate battles.
Last edited by Logan054 on Wed Aug 10, 2016 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AndyONeill
Posts: 2486
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 9:47 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby AndyONeill » Wed Aug 10, 2016 2:29 pm

What does implicitly told mean?

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Nibbles » Thu Aug 11, 2016 12:34 am

I'm not being optimistic, I'm just believing them when they say AoS is doing better than 8th did in years. If a new game did not do better than an old one that was in its dying years, then something would be disastrously wrong.

Of course, GW could be outright lying too, I don't have the sales figures of the two games so can't really compare them in order to find the empirical truth.
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Thu Aug 11, 2016 11:03 am

That's exactly why I think you're being optimistic, because honestly, i think they are lying looking at the sales.

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Nibbles » Sat Aug 13, 2016 12:18 pm

And I would agree with you if we had the data of late 8th sales to compare these new figures with, if those proved that GW is in fact actually lying.

I'm far too busy playing MWO right now to dig up these past reports though, so you do that instead! :)
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Sat Aug 13, 2016 2:09 pm

http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-c ... -cover.pdf
http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-c ... ersion.pdf

£123.5m for 2014
£134.6m for 2013

Royalties receivable 2014: £1.4m
Royalties receivable 2013: £1.0m

So If you go back to 2013 they received £133.6M without royalties compared to £112.1M this year, without royalties the company is generating half the money it was 3yrs ago. Even if you go back to 2012 it was bring in £131.0m with £3.5m received in royalties.

User avatar
silashand
Posts: 2933
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 3:15 am
Pick number 4 to enter: 1
Location: Great Hall of Karak Norn (Colorado, USA)
Contact:

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby silashand » Sun Aug 14, 2016 6:00 am

Just wondering how much of the AoS "increase" was actually due to people starting to play 9th Age and Kings of War. I know myself and a few others who for the first time in a long time purchased "AoS" figures, but it wasn't to play that game. As I recall when they did the Bretonnian sell-off they decided to do a second run of many of the plastics because they sold out so fast (I managed to pick up more Men at Arms finally when they did that).

Not bashing AoS, just honestly curious. I know GW doesn't really care as long as they sell models, but given the lack of interest in it everywhere I have been before the General's Handbook came out I find it hard to believe it outsold WFB by any stretch of the imagination. Granted, since the GH it appears a few more folks seem inclined to give it a try, but it was dead as a doorknob before that from what I could tell. YMMV though...
Admin - Bugman's Brewery

"Stand up for what you believe in, even if it means standing alone." - Unknown
"Every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do." - Voltaire (1694-1778)
"Each day you must choose: the pain of discipline or the pain of regret." - Unknown

6 x 9 = 42

User avatar
Nibbles
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:52 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Finland

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Nibbles » Sun Aug 14, 2016 5:07 pm

silashand wrote:Just wondering how much of the AoS "increase" was actually due to people starting to play 9th Age and Kings of War. I know myself and a few others who for the first time in a long time purchased "AoS" figures, but it wasn't to play that game. As I recall when they did the Bretonnian sell-off they decided to do a second run of many of the plastics because they sold out so fast (I managed to pick up more Men at Arms finally when they did that).

Not bashing AoS, just honestly curious. I know GW doesn't really care as long as they sell models, but given the lack of interest in it everywhere I have been before the General's Handbook came out I find it hard to believe it outsold WFB by any stretch of the imagination. Granted, since the GH it appears a few more folks seem inclined to give it a try, but it was dead as a doorknob before that from what I could tell. YMMV though...


Yes, while we can't know how big this percentage of buyers for other game systems has been, it is definitely there. It's always been there of course, but I do think that due to 9th and KoW it spiked higher than ever before.

Logan054 wrote:http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/May-15-stats-final-27-July-15-with-cover.pdf
http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-c ... ersion.pdf

£123.5m for 2014
£134.6m for 2013

Royalties receivable 2014: £1.4m
Royalties receivable 2013: £1.0m

So If you go back to 2013 they received £133.6M without royalties compared to £112.1M this year, without royalties the company is generating half the money it was 3yrs ago. Even if you go back to 2012 it was bring in £131.0m with £3.5m received in royalties.


Hmm, it seems GW is indeed lying then, unless 40k has suffered a massive drop in sales as well. I think we can estimate from these figures that AoS was truly a massive flop and is likely going to be replaced with a more traditional fantasy Warhammer game when the time comes. That might carry the name of AoS 2nd edition or not, we'll see. I think they would make good money on selling regimental trays for round based models this time...
I do respect your opinions even when I do not state so, we are all free to disagree and agree here. And I certainly do not assume that my ideas about the rules would be the only proper ones. We all have our own ways for playing these games and that is fine.

Logan054
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:39 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: London

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Logan054 » Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:33 pm

silashand wrote:Just wondering how much of the AoS "increase" was actually due to people starting to play 9th Age and Kings of War. I know myself and a few others who for the first time in a long time purchased "AoS" figures, but it wasn't to play that game. As I recall when they did the Bretonnian sell-off they decided to do a second run of many of the plastics because they sold out so fast (I managed to pick up more Men at Arms finally when they did that).

Not bashing AoS, just honestly curious. I know GW doesn't really care as long as they sell models, but given the lack of interest in it everywhere I have been before the General's Handbook came out I find it hard to believe it outsold WFB by any stretch of the imagination. Granted, since the GH it appears a few more folks seem inclined to give it a try, but it was dead as a doorknob before that from what I could tell. YMMV though...


When it came out I bought myself a few of the new plastic bits for my Khorne army, they did make some really cool models. I think he figures on the website clearly indicate that it isn't selling that well. Like I said earlier, the only way AoS is outselling warhammer is if people stopped buying spacemarines. What's also obvious is that vets bought a lot more than GW like to admit, sales have dropped by 20 million after numerous price rises.

Nibbles wrote:Hmm, it seems GW is indeed lying then, unless 40k has suffered a massive drop in sales as well. I think we can estimate from these figures that AoS was truly a massive flop and is likely going to be replaced with a more traditional fantasy Warhammer game when the time comes. That might carry the name of AoS 2nd edition or not, we'll see. I think they would make good money on selling regimental trays for round based models this time...


The reality is I think GW might have learnt you can't treat your loyal customers they way they did with AoS. They might do some kind of AoS 2nd ed aimed at the ranked combat players, I have a funny feeling they will just can it and release a proper 30k game because clearly, GW only knows how to sell spacemarines. Mind you, if this AoS version of 40k comes to pass, yeah.... I think we are going to see a massive drop of sales.

herjan1987
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 6:13 am
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby herjan1987 » Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:51 pm

Backgammon wrote:* The leadership faced an attack by investors trying to get rid of them. Seems to be about salaries being too high. For those interested, Kevin Roundtree makes 402 000 GBP per year. I think the revolt is probably also about investors rebelling about decisions being made. In any case, they survived the attack.


Where did you get this info? Is this the last years investors warning?

Backgammon
Posts: 511
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:11 pm
Anti-Spam Filter: No
Pick number 4 to enter: 4
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: 2016 Financial Report

Postby Backgammon » Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:11 am

herjan1987 wrote:
Backgammon wrote:* The leadership faced an attack by investors trying to get rid of them. Seems to be about salaries being too high. For those interested, Kevin Roundtree makes 402 000 GBP per year. I think the revolt is probably also about investors rebelling about decisions being made. In any case, they survived the attack.


Where did you get this info? Is this the last years investors warning?


The report is linked in my opening thread. I'm not sure what you are refering to in regards to "this info". The report states black on white shareholders had an uprising, hints pretty strongly it was about executive salary, and Mr Roundtree's salary is disclosed in the report. It is my speculation, reading between the lines, that the revolt was about more than just salaries. Shareholders rarely care about anything but plummeting share values, and share values are driven by executive decisions that affect company direction.


Return to “Warhammer Fantasy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest