Mark Wellls out as CEO of GW

[Defenestratus]

http://investor.games-workshop.com/

And yes, you spell his name with three L's :P

(forgive me, i'm technically blind)

[SotonShades]

While I'm certain he has had an impact on the company, I have no idea what exactly it has been.

I hope this is going to be good news for GW, with a push for further growth and development, rather than appointing a CEO from outside the hobby community who might just squeeze out profits for shareholders. I imagine that would be very unlikely, but I'll wait to see.

[DarkLink]

Without profits, you can't have any growth or development. Why do people find that such a difficult concept?

[Emerald Rose Widow]

Without profits, you can't have any growth or development. Why do people find that such a difficult concept?

it is also important to know that free markets move towards an equilibrium, which is on a much larger scale than the individual. Everyone thinks of this as what their friends and them can afford, but its much larger than that. GW does the pricing that it does because it makes them money, and will cease to do so when it doesn't. The market wants to move to an equilibrium where the price they charge gets them the most profit, and sometimes increasing price too much can counteract this as fewer people can afford it. When and if this happens with games workshop, they will either drop their prices, or they will fail, and that is not in their best interest.

At current prices, much as people complain about it, GW makes a killing. Grant you some can argue that lower prices can do more for the community in the long run, because it brings more people in, we have no way of measuring that whether it is true or false.

tldr; GW is probably not going to change their pricing structure just because their CEO is changing, they might change marketing strategies, but pricing structure is likely to stay the same for a long time.

[SotonShades]

Oh I am certainly not against profits. However, often shareholders forget that profits don't always equate to money in their pockets and thus demand more, which takes away from the company's ability to grow. A strong CEO can control the shareholders, measure their interests and ensure the company grows and invests in development. A lot of CEOs simply submit to shareholders' wishes, or worse yet encourage the greed and wring as much money out of companies as possible, forcing 'profit' that leaves the company worse off in the long run, well after the CEO has taken his/her cut.

More specifically to GW, it is easy to see the product as a luxury item and charge a premium for them, artificially inflating profits (I am not saying GW have been doing this the past few years like many suggest, just that it is possible) without actually growing the business. We want and need a CEO who understands why we buy the product; not simply because it is a shiny thing we like to display and show off (like having the latest iProduct) but something we emotionally invest in. To that end we need the investment in the creative side of the company with models, rules, background story and artwork, giving us new reasons to want to spend our money with them. Technology too, such as the implementation of the CAD sculpting and CNC/CAM manufacturing techniques GW has worked on over the last decade.

It'd be all too easy for a CEO who isn't part of or at least very aware of the wargaming community to milk GW for profit is a purely model making company. It would ruin what GW has worked so hard to build up over the last four decades or so. I have no doubt that the board of directors and shareholders wouldn't let that happen, but it wouldn't be the first time such a dreaded thing has. Fingers crossed for the new guy. I'd give it a go, but I doubt my time as President of a University Paintball club would be impressive enough to run a multi-million pound company :P

[Emerald Rose Widow]

More specifically to GW, it is easy to see the product as a luxury item and charge a premium for them, artificially inflating profits (I am not saying GW have been doing this the past few years like many suggest, just that it is possible) without actually growing the business. We want and need a CEO who understands why we buy the product; not simply because it is a shiny thing we like to display and show off (like having the latest iProduct) but something we emotionally invest in. To that end we need the investment in the creative side of the company with models, rules, background story and artwork, giving us new reasons to want to spend our money with them. Technology too, such as the implementation of the CAD sculpting and CNC/CAM manufacturing techniques GW has worked on over the last decade.

See things such as these are the things I would like to see, more focus on that and improvement of white dwarf. I am not sure what the new CEO would want to do with the company, but still would be cool. They can still invest in the community without putting tons of money into it.

The new techs in modelling over the past years have been amazing, leading to new sculpts. My tervigon for example, the joints where two pieces meet were nigh seemless. I had very little liquid greenstuffing to do, the seams were just that good.

[JxKxR]

I'd like to see less price hikes and more marketing in hopes of upping profits. There are A TON of people out there that would love to get into table top war gaming they just don't know it yet. Everyone that I introduce to 40K really loves it, even chicks.

The only thing people don't like are-

1. The rules lawyers! It's a game people.

2. The UBER nerds. The poorly dressed, horrible hygiene, generally creepy guy with bad social skills. Sometimes this guy is the one in charge of the store. GW are the leaders of the table top community and they should be the ones that update the image of the community to the public.

3. The price.

And you know if I was C.E.O. I would totally do whatever I had to to get my hands on the Star Wars brand. Now that Disney will be making new movies just think of what kind of traffic it would bring into the stores. Like Lord of the Ring did and how they wanted the Hobbit to.
Personally if they aren't working on that right now they are idiots over there.

[Mr Mystery]

You make less money on a licensed brand than an owned one. Risk is Star Wars would annihilate 40k and Fantasy. When that bubble pops, company struggles to match profit, investment drops, company can eventually fold.

As for advertising, done once, and it has to be repeated to again continually show an increase in profits.

[JxKxR]

I just firmly believe the benefits outweigh the risk.

Yes it has to be continually repeated to increase profit and it should.

[rtmaitreya]

You make less money on a licensed brand than an owned one. Risk is Star Wars would annihilate 40k and Fantasy. s.

This is absolutely true. Star Wars would overwhelm GW. Go with a storyline that already has an entrenched fan base, but that needs to grow. My advice would be Robotech. Half of your player base is familiar with it, and the other half is at the right age group to embrace it. Partner up with Jerry Macguire to make sculpts that match the movie, and go for it. Would take three years, and you'd have SERIOUS cash cow you could milk for a decade or two.

RTM

[Mr Mystery]

Is Robotech not a bit of a 'toxic' brand though? Seems to be forever coming and going?

And before anyone bites me head off, this is a question and not a statement k?

[Emerald Rose Widow]

This is absolutely true. Star Wars would overwhelm GW. Go with a storyline that already has an entrenched fan base, but that needs to grow. My advice would be Robotech. Half of your player base is familiar with it, and the other half is at the right age group to embrace it. Partner up with Jerry Macguire to make sculpts that match the movie, and go for it. Would take three years, and you'd have SERIOUS cash cow you could milk for a decade or two.

RTM

or they can take the world they already have that has a massive fan base (its called warhammer) and grow it

[Farseer Uthiliesh]

or they can take the world they already have that has a massive fan base (its called warhammer) and grow it

Agreed. Let FFG handle licenses, and GW develop its fantastic settings.

[Shipmonkey]

I just firmly believe the benefits outweigh the risk.

Yes it has to be continually repeated to increase profit and it should.

Except why would the company try to reopen a branch of the company they have already shut down once? Part of the deal for the Star Wars license was that the licensee had to take the full license which included both miniature games and RPGs. GW has no interest in RPGs.

And, to be honest, a good chunk of 40Ks success is that it's kinda Star Wars like and Star Wars has never had a similar mini game on the market. A Star Wars game with GW quality minis to support it would slaughter 40k. GW is not crazy enough to kill their golden goose.

[jgebi]

I think with 40K they should just go ok we have milked the 40th millenium to much now lets move on or get bigger staff teams for a while and get all the codexs balanced to let new people have a fair starting point with any race also get rid of their ****en bias staff (my biggist pet pev with them)

[gendoikari87]

Good riddance to a bad CEO. Now if the rest of the people running the company would just leave we might be able to save the damn hobby.

[sergentzimm]

Not sure I would take that job if they offered it. I think the next few years will be tough. I think the death knell of GW is fast approaching with the advances in 3d printing. They better wake up to that a lot quicker than they did to the electronic book tech.

[rtmaitreya]

Not sure I would take that job if they offered it. I think the next few years will be tough. I think the death knell of GW is fast approaching with the advances in 3d printing. They better wake up to that a lot quicker than they did to the electronic book tech.

3d printing is inherently expensive compared to injection molded plastics. There is NO WAY they can compete. The bottom is so much further down that you can possibly imagine for injection molding. If GW can crank out the brand, and control the IJP, there is no technology in the past, present, or near future that can compete. A box of 30 miniatures is pennies. Pennies. Not $5 a figure, not $15 a figure, but $0.01 at the high end, more like $0.003-0.004 for a multi-part warrior. Expand the brand to reach the everykid, and you're set. Get busy making a product for china and india, where there are 100x as many kids, and they have money. That's what I'd be doing as a CEO of GW. Hell, that's kind of what I'm doing as an executive at my own company.

[Kawauso]

Yeah, 3D printing isn't really a threat to GW for a long, long time to come, if ever.
Right now, at least, there isn't really any demand for that sort of technology in the average home...and that's going to keep it from becoming prolific in the same way as 2D printers. Not saying there won't be a day in the future where it could happen - it just seems really unlikely right now.

As for GW expanding their market - sure, they could. They seem satisfied remaining a high-end product, though. But if they did, in China's case they'd have a pretty hard time of it; depictions of skulls and other recognizably human remains (but skulls in particular) are censored in China. It's an issue that games like World of Warcraft and Magic: The Gathering have had to deal with in the past (leading to some pretty alive-looking undead in many cases). For GW that could be a serious problem considering their affinity with skull motifs.

[Mr Mystery]

Good riddance to a bad CEO. Now if the rest of the people running the company would just leave we might be able to save the damn hobby.

And what made him a bad CEO? Was it successfully restructuring the company? Was it ensuring staff training improved? Was it ensuring a return to growth during a particularly severe recession?

[Defenestratus]

And what made him a bad CEO? Was it successfully restructuring the company? Was it ensuring staff training improved? Was it ensuring a return to growth during a particularly severe recession?

Exactly.

If you measure him against what CEO's should be doing then he did a pretty damn fine job as the numbers go.

[Emerald Rose Widow]

Good riddance to a bad CEO. Now if the rest of the people running the company would just leave we might be able to save the damn hobby.

oh don't be melodramatic, the hobby will be and has been fine, what will hurt the hobby is GW going under which all data shows Mark Wellls kept from happening during a major downturn in the economy. How GW does its business is basic economics, they are not trying to make it so people cant play anymore, or price them out of the hobby, that doesn't work in their best interests.

[Defenestratus]

oh don't be melodramatic, the hobby will be and has been fine, what will hurt the hobby is GW going under which all data shows Mark Wellls kept from happening during a major downturn in the economy. How GW does its business is basic economics, they are not trying to make it so people cant play anymore, or price them out of the hobby, that doesn't work in their best interests.

You forget that good ole gendo isn't a fan of capitalism :P

He'd rather there be a Czar of toy solder manufacturing.

[Emerald Rose Widow]

You forget that good ole gendo isn't a fan of capitalism :P

He'd rather there be a Czar of toy solder manufacturing.

that is a bit much don't you think? No need to attack the person.

[eldargal]

Mark Wells became CEO in 2007, let's look at their share price:
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=GAW.L&t=my&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en

Unless the share price crashed dramatically in the next few months (no reason to assume it will given its excellent mid-year financial report) then GW is seeing a very positive trend in its share price since Wells took over. Nice, steady sustainable increase. GW have next to no debt, are highly profitable and could buy their leading competitors with the profits from one year if they so wished (and they were for sale). So clealty Wells was a terible CEO.:rolleyes:

[Mr Mystery]

I guess it's partly to do with the hobby being a personal thing, but I will always be baffled that some seem to object it being run for a profit!

[Defenestratus]

that is a bit much don't you think? No need to attack the person.

Emerald,

Perhaps the last "word in mouth" piece was a bit much, but he's basically come on out and said as much about capitalism himself.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I don't like capitalism either, but it's the way things are run, and by capitalist metrics, Wells was very effective. Given that this has helped preserve (and improve!) a hobby I enjoy very much indeed, I'm okay with that. Believe it or not, there are way, way more harmful (and way less successful, honestly) companies out there than GW.

[sergentzimm]

Yeah, 3D printing isn't really a threat to GW for a long, long time to come, if ever.
Right now, at least, there isn't really any demand for that sort of technology in the average home...and that's going to keep it from becoming prolific in the same way as 2D printers. Not saying there won't be a day in the future where it could happen - it just seems really unlikely right now.

As for GW expanding their market - sure, they could. They seem satisfied remaining a high-end product, though. But if they did, in China's case they'd have a pretty hard time of it; depictions of skulls and other recognizably human remains (but skulls in particular) are censored in China. It's an issue that games like World of Warcraft and Magic: The Gathering have had to deal with in the past (leading to some pretty alive-looking undead in many cases). For GW that could be a serious problem considering their affinity with skull motifs.

that is the attitude that will kill them. I give it 5 years before consumer grade 3d printers will get viable enough to hurt the industry greatly. Already, I can print a "hippo" that isnt too bad for a rhino replacement. The materials are only going to come down in price over time. Especially with the recyclers gaining steam. The cost per print will become feasible more quickly than you think, for the consumer.

[Mr Mystery]

I disagree.

3D printing is a long way off being home viable. I mean, consider the now humble laser printer. They're in offices, but not so much in homes.

Most people can't afford the running costs, and for many even an inkjet is prohibitive. 3D is so specific in it's uses it will be a long old time before they are ubiquitous.

[sergentzimm]

Mark Wells became CEO in 2007, let's look at their share price:
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=GAW.L&t=my&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en

Unless the share price crashed dramatically in the next few months (no reason to assume it will given its excellent mid-year financial report) then GW is seeing a very positive trend in its share price since Wells took over. Nice, steady sustainable increase. GW have next to no debt, are highly profitable and could buy their leading competitors with the profits from one year if they so wished (and they were for sale). So clealty Wells was a terible CEO.:rolleyes:

Ignoring and screwing your customer base can increase profits on the short term. Retail cuts and finecast are going to catch up to them. As is a business model based on new customers trumping existing. Reality will catch up eventually. They have a huge advantage in their manufacturing process and plastics, but that won't last. Others are catching up.

[Mr Mystery]

Define short term? They've been doing well throughout one of the worst global recessions, not only turning a profit but achieving growth as well. And that recession is entering it's fifth (count 'em!) year!!

Seems to me their strategy is working pretty well?

[Emerald Rose Widow]

Define short term? They've been doing well throughout one of the worst global recessions, not only turning a profit but achieving growth as well. And that recession is entering it's fifth (count 'em!) year!!

Seems to me their strategy is working pretty well?

the kind of long term I think they are talking about is usually on the scale of decades

[Mr Mystery]

Is that much forward planning worth it? I mean, 1992 Britain hit recession, came out and enjoyed a period of significant prosperity, and then in 2008 economy went back down the ****ter and has stayed there?

Is there anything to be gained? I ask this honestly, as my professional skill set is dispute resolution and customer service!

[Defenestratus]

I disagree.

3D printing is a long way off being home viable. I mean, consider the now humble laser printer. They're in offices, but not so much in homes.

Most people can't afford the running costs, and for many even an inkjet is prohibitive. 3D is so specific in it's uses it will be a long old time before they are ubiquitous.

I don't think you can look at the traditional printer market and make correlations.

The reason most people don't have laser printers in their homes is because typical home users aren't printing enough to make laser printers financially viable. For much less overall cost, an inkjet meets the needs of home users since they're not cranking out 10x 50 page slide presentations for meetings but they do need to print off the occasional bill or invoice.

3D printer might indeed have different levels such as the inkjet/laser printer model does now. One designed for high volume printing and one more designed for occasional light duty work.

I remember "back in the day" that it was simply cost prohibitive to even own a dot matrix printer unless you were writing manuscripts for a living or something.

[Mr Mystery]

I'm still less than convinced.

Cost and quality are it's main hurdles. Sure it can do basic stuff right now, but nowhere near the detail required to do a decent miniature. And there isn't a massive market for that sort of resolution.

Will we see 3d printing in homes? Eventually I guess. With the resolution high enough for minis? Can't see it myself. And that is it's biggest hurdle.

Plus those claiming it will be the death of GW? Bit of a leap in logic. GW have the option to sell the patterns, diversifying. Is that open to piracy? Sure. But the thieving type are happily a minority.

[gendoikari87]

Mark Wells became CEO in 2007, let's look at their share price:
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=GAW.L&t=my&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en

Unless the share price crashed dramatically in the next few months (no reason to assume it will given its excellent mid-year financial report) then GW is seeing a very positive trend in its share price since Wells took over. Nice, steady sustainable increase. GW have next to no debt, are highly profitable and could buy their leading competitors with the profits from one year if they so wished (and they were for sale). So clealty Wells was a terible CEO.:rolleyes:
Profiteering isn't exactly what I'd call Good or sustainable, do you honestly think that sort of increase could come from mark because he was bringing in so many more players? No, he might have made things more efficient, but a good bulk of that has been on the backs of what were loyal customers. there's nothing wrong with making money but when that is your sole goal, you've lost sight of what is imporant and will eventually fall because of it.

[gendoikari87]

Ignoring and screwing your customer base can increase profits on the short term. Retail cuts and finecast are going to catch up to them. As is a business model based on new customers trumping existing. Reality will catch up eventually. They have a huge advantage in their manufacturing process and plastics, but that won't last. Others are catching up.

Exactly, slash burn and pillage drives up your profits, and can do so for a fair good years, but it is destructive to your profit margin on a long term basis. It only really makes sense if you believe your company to be doomed from the start.

[Tynskel]

it is also important to know that free markets move towards an equilibrium, which is on a much larger scale than the individual. Everyone thinks of this as what their friends and them can afford, but its much larger than that. GW does the pricing that it does because it makes them money, and will cease to do so when it doesn't. The market wants to move to an equilibrium where the price they charge gets them the most profit, and sometimes increasing price too much can counteract this as fewer people can afford it. When and if this happens with games workshop, they will either drop their prices, or they will fail, and that is not in their best interest.

At current prices, much as people complain about it, GW makes a killing. Grant you some can argue that lower prices can do more for the community in the long run, because it brings more people in, we have no way of measuring that whether it is true or false.

tldr; GW is probably not going to change their pricing structure just because their CEO is changing, they might change marketing strategies, but pricing structure is likely to stay the same for a long time.

I still haven't figured out how people complain about the prices.
They are just as expensive as they were 20 years ago. However, the quality of their product has gone up considerably. Considering this, I find GW cheaper than they were 20 years ago.

[Mr Mystery]

Exactly, slash burn and pillage drives up your profits, and can do so for a fair good years, but it is destructive to your profit margin on a long term basis. It only really makes sense if you believe your company to be doomed from the start.

And this apparently intimate knowledge of GW's plan is based on?

As for slash and burn... They have reduced overheads and invested heavily in there existing staff. Training is an ongoing process, and pays dividends. UK stores are in growth. And it's often touted that they sell less, but nobody has yet offered up anything beyond supposition/allegation to support this.

Hobbit seems to be doing well, and will very likely continue to do so for the next couple of years. Error last time came from poorly trained staff (I know, I was one of them) being unable to retain gamers. Now they're properly trained (had the benefit of the new regimen myself...) that has been more or less addressed.

So facts as figures please to back up your stand point.

[eldargal]

Ignoring and screwing your customer base can increase profits on the short term.
Ignoring and screwing your customer base are both subjective judgements.

Retail cuts and finecast are going to catch up to them.
Assumption

As is a business model based on new customers trumping existing.
Assumption, it has worked for them for twenty years.

Reality will catch up eventually.
Assumption.

They have a huge advantage in their manufacturing process and plastics, but that won't last.
Ony if they stand still.


Others are catching up.
Questionable, the only other large-scale plastic injection moulding companies are in China bar Renedra and Renedra is booked to capacity. No other companies maintain in-house injection moulding the way GW does because it is phenomenally expensive, without a huge injection of capital they won't be able to invest in it the way GW has.


Exactly, slash burn and pillage drives up your profits, and can do so for a fair good years, but it is destructive to your profit margin on a long term basis. It only really makes sense if you believe your company to be doomed from the start.
You evidently do not know what slash and burn means.

[Defenestratus]

Ignoring and screwing your customer base can increase profits on the short term. Retail cuts and finecast are going to catch up to them. As is a business model based on new customers trumping existing. Reality will catch up eventually. They have a huge advantage in their manufacturing process and plastics, but that won't last. Others are catching up.

I'm still trying to figure out what this all means.

"Ignoring and screwing your customer base"???

Like how?

And if you say price increases - then I know that you really have no argument.

[Psychosplodge]

Questionable, the only other large-scale plastic injection moulding companies are in China bar Renedra and Renedra is booked to capacity. No other companies maintain in-house injection moulding the way GW does because it is phenomenally expensive, without a huge injection of capital they won't be able to invest in it the way GW has.

I'm not sure what scale you're looking for, but there are several injection moulding companies in this country with large capacities, but from my understanding they aren't cutting edge like GW as they tend to just churn out endless runs of gravy lids or toiletries bottles, which older technology is perfectly suited to.

[Mr Mystery]

Also, saw mention of profiteering. In what way?

To me profiteering is making a product as cheaply as possible, including human labour costs. Sure GW has switched to a(allegedly, I've never been shown actual supporting evidence) cheaper material, but this is still predominantly made in the UK, where we have a minimum wage (which if memory serves is around £6 an hour?) and I am willing to be those working in the foundry are skilled enough to warrant higher wages.

And seriously, go take a look at their actual profit margin. £10 says it's nowhere near as high as you think it is, and certainly nowhere near the sort of percentage where one could rationally say profiteering is involved.

[Psychosplodge]

The profit margin must be high as retailers can offer 25%(some used to be higher) off rrp and there must still be room for their and GW's profit in there...

[Mr Mystery]

Remember Splodgington, Mark Up is not profit margin!

[Psychosplodge]

Pray do tell good sir, What would the difference be?

[Defenestratus]

Profit = Revenue - expenses.

You assume that the 25% markup is just straight piggy bank money. That 25% pays for the retailer's utility bills, rent, employees.

Out of that 25% markup, a fraction of it would be actual profit.

[Psychosplodge]

No I think you've missed what I was getting at there. That's not the assumption I've made at all, that 25% isn't even there, that's the point it's 25% less to work with.

most none GW retailers sell the item for as little as 75% of a GW retail store correct? and not the RRP that GW charge?

In doing so GW will still make a profit at their "trade" or "wholesale" price, and there is still apparently room in there for the retailer to make profit as well or they wouldn't stock it.

so the profit margin is probably quite good.

[Zahariel]

Unless of course they're selling at a reduced profit margin in favour of increased turnover and to get people to look at other products they stock? Some other products would offer a higher margin perhaps, thereby offsetting the reduction?

That's how most retail works I think?

[Mr Mystery]

Unless of course they're selling at a reduced profit margin in favour of increased turnover and to get people to look at other products they stock? Some other products would offer a higher margin perhaps, thereby offsetting the reduction?

That's how most retail works I think?

GW as a company make more profit on third party sales than anywhere else. Soon as it's their own store, actually profit margin shifts. I believe, mostly through hearsay that TP sales are around 60% of rep?

[TashaG]

Unless of course they're selling at a reduced profit margin in favour of increased turnover and to get people to look at other products they stock? Some other products would offer a higher margin perhaps, thereby offsetting the reduction?

That's how most retail works I think?

Yeah, that's how Lost Leader Retailing works. The idea is that you discount pretty much everything, but are shooting for a particular average Margin for everything you sell. It works best if you have a huge database where you can see what items move and what items don't. Then you can target your Lost Leader items and have related product that is "Must have" that bumps up the average profit.

The older model of Discounters is to discount everything you can, leaving yourself both enough for expenses and enough for some profit. I would guess that online retailers who seem to have everything discounted rely on this model.

I also realize that many online retailers also subsidize their discount products by selling the contents of GW kits piecemeal (ie Bitz). The Bitz tend to be priced to be more expensive than just buying the model at full price. The increased price gives a nice profit margin and also cushions the bits seller against parts that aren't in real demand.

What retailers margins are doesn't really have any correlation to what the markup of the product is to the Manufacturer. That depends wholly on the goals of the company making that item. I have seen companies who sell products at their break even cost, and still have enough retail margin to make their retailers and distributors happy. We can only guess at what GW's Margins are. I would imagine that the plastics would tend to have better margins than the Metals and Resin products. Though, we also have to keep in mind that making the molds for the plastic items is VERY expensive. So that cost must be folded into what GW sells the product for. Also the Packaging, Sculpting, Advertizing (even if it's in WD), and the various manpower costs can turn that Space Marine that costs less than a penny in plastic into one that costs a dollar or more.

I know from friends who own game stores that the Price Hikes have had a negative impact on sales. Whether this will even out as people become accustomed to the new price points is unknown. I do know that with the Dark Angels models, sticker shock is really keeping me from buying everything I see. I guess I personally have a problem with seeing the value in a flyer that costs $75 full retail.

[jimmyriddle]

so the profit margin is probably quite good.

Probably not as good as you are making out.

Online stores don't have as many overheads, staff etc, and they certainly con't offer painting tutorials, gaming tutorials or a place to hobby.

Also they don't put staff time into painting store models etc.

From what I have seen most GW stores have huge armies of all types and will give you demo games with armies of your choice.

Yes it costs more, but it's the service they provide. I'm new to this hobby, one of the things that I like about it is the level of service I get from my local GW store.

[Defenestratus]

Unless of course they're selling at a reduced profit margin in favour of increased turnover and to get people to look at other products they stock? Some other products would offer a higher margin perhaps, thereby offsetting the reduction?

That's how most retail works I think?

Yes - its called a loss leader.