CrookedEye
Fear the Crooked Eye
Have been posted. It\'s an interesting read if you care about that sort of thing.
Year End Summary
Full Report
Zach
Year End Summary
Full Report
Zach
GW year end results
- Thread starter CrookedEye
- Start date
NGArtStudios
New member
Interesting read indeed. Thanks for posting.
The only thing that baffles me is why are they still imposing harsh constraints on independent retailers (moving all but boxed sets to direct only, no display of their products in IR online shops, etc), if it\'s the independent retailers that are driving their business. 41% of total sales is a big portion.
I understand that there are benefits to being able to control as much of your product sales as directly as possible, but at the same time it seems like it would be much more cost effective and dare I say profitable giving these independent retailers more incentives rather than taking them away.
But hey, they must be doing something right, those reports look pretty good.
The only thing that baffles me is why are they still imposing harsh constraints on independent retailers (moving all but boxed sets to direct only, no display of their products in IR online shops, etc), if it\'s the independent retailers that are driving their business. 41% of total sales is a big portion.
I understand that there are benefits to being able to control as much of your product sales as directly as possible, but at the same time it seems like it would be much more cost effective and dare I say profitable giving these independent retailers more incentives rather than taking them away.
But hey, they must be doing something right, those reports look pretty good.
generulpoleaxe
New member
Originally posted by Avelorn
People have time for their hobbies when they get unemployed perhaps?
in a recession people spend more time and money on their hobbies as it is generaly cheaper than going out.
edited due to my putting holidays instead of hobbies!
ScottRadom
Shogun of Saskatchewan
Just paraphrasing, but a few choice quotes from the report....
\"Restructuring and rebuilding of the tower of Barad-Dur commences well. Soon we will engulf the world in a new age of tyranny.\"
\"Baby-Eating is up 53% last quarter alone. Well done all red-shirts!\"
\"Our Skull to Model ratio continues to lead the way! Excellent work to everyone. Reccomend slight loosening of the chains on the ankles of the sculptors every twelve days and an extra rat to be fed to them on holidays.\"
\"Internet hatred and slander of our product and policies continues. Reccomend annexing the Sudetenland and increasing production of our karbine rifles. We need lebensraum!\"
Just kidding. I still love GW. Looks like they\'ve turned a corner.
CrookedEye
Fear the Crooked Eye
Read the summary link, it\'s pretty simple. Six slides maybe, lots of pictures.
:flip:
Zach
generulpoleaxe
New member
This is a neat trick they may have used.
Big Bath accounting is the process where publicly traded corporations write-off or write-down certain assets from their balance sheets in a single year. The write-off removes or reduces the asset from the financial books and results in lower net income for that year. The objective is to ‘take one big bath’ in a single year so future years will show increased net income. This technique is often employed in a year when sales are down from other external factors and the company would report a loss in any event. For example, inventory valued on the books at $100 per item is written down to $50 per item resulting in a net loss of $50 per item in the current year. Note there is no cash impact to this write-down. When that same inventory is sold in later years for $75 per item, the company reports an income of $25 per item in the future period. This process takes an inventory loss and turns it into a ‘profit’. Corporations will often wait until a bad year to employ this ‘big bath’ technique to ‘clean up’ the balance sheet. Although the process is discouraged by auditors, it is still used. In recent times, General Motors and other US Corporations have taken huge write downs on balance sheet assets resulting in massive losses. The same result can be achieved by recording in one year the future cash costs of expected plant closing or employee layoffs. The objective is to take these loses all at once, so future periods can show positive net ncome.
Big Bath accounting is the process where publicly traded corporations write-off or write-down certain assets from their balance sheets in a single year. The write-off removes or reduces the asset from the financial books and results in lower net income for that year. The objective is to ‘take one big bath’ in a single year so future years will show increased net income. This technique is often employed in a year when sales are down from other external factors and the company would report a loss in any event. For example, inventory valued on the books at $100 per item is written down to $50 per item resulting in a net loss of $50 per item in the current year. Note there is no cash impact to this write-down. When that same inventory is sold in later years for $75 per item, the company reports an income of $25 per item in the future period. This process takes an inventory loss and turns it into a ‘profit’. Corporations will often wait until a bad year to employ this ‘big bath’ technique to ‘clean up’ the balance sheet. Although the process is discouraged by auditors, it is still used. In recent times, General Motors and other US Corporations have taken huge write downs on balance sheet assets resulting in massive losses. The same result can be achieved by recording in one year the future cash costs of expected plant closing or employee layoffs. The objective is to take these loses all at once, so future periods can show positive net ncome.
Legacy Account
Active member
Fleecing customers for plastic figures is working obviously
Some utter bullshit in that report:
\"...higher prices - enabling us to respond when costs increase dramatically as the price of tin did last summer; and, very importantly, a better balance between the price of our plastic miniatures and our metal ones - for similar models prices ought to be similar and not less \'because they are plastic\'.\"
\"Raw material prices have returned to more normal levels in the second half but we continue to invest in converting more of our range to plastic, both to improve the quality of the models and make us less sensitive to metal cost fluctuations.\"
\"...the quality of our new plastic miniatures are now superior to their metal counterparts. By charging what these new models are worth, we can continue to invest in further plastic product development and quality improvements across the range.\"
So something that\'s CHEAPER to produce should be marketed at the price of something that\'s MORE EXPENSIVE and made out of better quality materials? BOLLOCKS! Quality of models has nothing to do with it. They make more money out of plastics, simple as. More fool the numpties who are willing to spend 25 quid on ten plastic figures.
Some utter bullshit in that report:
\"...higher prices - enabling us to respond when costs increase dramatically as the price of tin did last summer; and, very importantly, a better balance between the price of our plastic miniatures and our metal ones - for similar models prices ought to be similar and not less \'because they are plastic\'.\"
\"Raw material prices have returned to more normal levels in the second half but we continue to invest in converting more of our range to plastic, both to improve the quality of the models and make us less sensitive to metal cost fluctuations.\"
\"...the quality of our new plastic miniatures are now superior to their metal counterparts. By charging what these new models are worth, we can continue to invest in further plastic product development and quality improvements across the range.\"
So something that\'s CHEAPER to produce should be marketed at the price of something that\'s MORE EXPENSIVE and made out of better quality materials? BOLLOCKS! Quality of models has nothing to do with it. They make more money out of plastics, simple as. More fool the numpties who are willing to spend 25 quid on ten plastic figures.
NGArtStudios
New member
Sounds like good ol\' GW to me.
DrEvilmonki
Active member
They may very well make more money from plastics - but I for one tend to agree with them regarding the quality.
What interests me most about these results is the opinion of those who were foaming at the mouth with the prospect of GW demise after their last 2 years figures.
What interests me most about these results is the opinion of those who were foaming at the mouth with the prospect of GW demise after their last 2 years figures.
RuneBrush
New member
To be honest, I\'ve always prefered plastic models over metal, since opening the box of Warhammer Quest many moons ago (the plastics were brilliant for their day). Easier to tidy up, convert, transport, etc. I do resent paying £25 for ten men, but I resent that wether they\'re metal or plastic. I solve this by rarely purchasing models direct from GW and instead go online and buy from a store that sells them for 20~25% less.
I\'m not going to fault GW for making that move or putting the prices of all models in line with each other - however I do hope that now that most of the product range is made from less price-fluctuating material, that we won\'t see prices of models going up for a few years.
I\'m not going to fault GW for making that move or putting the prices of all models in line with each other - however I do hope that now that most of the product range is made from less price-fluctuating material, that we won\'t see prices of models going up for a few years.
this pissed me off. are they seriously trying to tell us that their plastics are better than their metals? utter crap i tell you, take a look at scout sergeant Telion and the troops hes supposed to lead. telion has lots of great detail and character, the scout squad made of plastics look like something my 2-yearold would create in sillyputty compared to that. if gw is serious about this claim they are very retarded.
Joek
New member
I don\'t think that\'s the fault of the material, more the quality of the sculpt itself. There are some tremendous plastics in the GW range, and there are some equally terrible metal sculpts too. And obviously vice-versa.
What is becoming more and more annoying is the quality of the moulds - a lot of the olders sprues are becoming decidedly inferior - huge amounts of reworking having to go on before you can get a useable figure. I assume there is some sort of Q/C limit to how far they can push them before you need to start again, but plastics like the Tau and even the Space Marines are starting to become very wearisome to do.
IIRC one of the arguments, if not THE argument even, GW gave for switching focus to plastics, back when they started on that route, was that it would be cheaper to set up an army. And now they say that the price shouldn\'t depend on what material the mini is made off...
The quality of their plastic products may be better than what it was years ago, but it is definitely nothing spectacular considering what companies like Tamiya have been producing for decades.
Statements like these are arrogant and insulting to the customers. I\'m glad I\'m not one of them...
The quality of their plastic products may be better than what it was years ago, but it is definitely nothing spectacular considering what companies like Tamiya have been producing for decades.
Statements like these are arrogant and insulting to the customers. I\'m glad I\'m not one of them...
mattsterbenz
New member
Good for GW, I hope it keeps going that way. Looks like they\'ve turned some things around.
For armies I greatly prefer the plastics. Much easier to build and clean, and the customizing is really nice when you\'ve got dozens of the same model. (Even with the price increases they still are cheaper than buying all metals. Just compare the cost a Grey Knight army versus a Space Marine army. It\'s not as great of a savings as it used to be but still some. Battalions and Battle Force boxes are a great deal).
There are some plastic models that aren\'t too hot (such as the scouts already mentioned) and IMO the newer Dwarfs are pretty ugly.
I prefer metal figures for the real high quality stuff though. Get a bit more detail and most of all you get better texture. Plastic molds just can\'t replicate texture of fur and other fine details as good as the rubber molds for metal figures can.
The rubber molds for metals and resins can also get that nice \"undercut\" around pouches, belts, etc... that plastic molds cannot get because they are not flexible like the rubber, and make the sculpted details appear fused to the model.
-Matt
For armies I greatly prefer the plastics. Much easier to build and clean, and the customizing is really nice when you\'ve got dozens of the same model. (Even with the price increases they still are cheaper than buying all metals. Just compare the cost a Grey Knight army versus a Space Marine army. It\'s not as great of a savings as it used to be but still some. Battalions and Battle Force boxes are a great deal).
There are some plastic models that aren\'t too hot (such as the scouts already mentioned) and IMO the newer Dwarfs are pretty ugly.
I prefer metal figures for the real high quality stuff though. Get a bit more detail and most of all you get better texture. Plastic molds just can\'t replicate texture of fur and other fine details as good as the rubber molds for metal figures can.
The rubber molds for metals and resins can also get that nice \"undercut\" around pouches, belts, etc... that plastic molds cannot get because they are not flexible like the rubber, and make the sculpted details appear fused to the model.
-Matt
