I think this thread is pretty played out, to be honest…

Fans of WHFB are always going to be upset with the whole “Mc-Wargame” approach that GW has been taking with 40k and AoS, and are never going to truly forget or forgive the whole End Times debacle.

Fans of AoS are never going to stop enjoying wallowing in glib satisfaction at telling Fantasy fans to “let the past die”, and talk about how Fantasy had no demand, made no money, and was unsustainable.

None of us have any evidence beyond anecdotes, profit reports (which are not broken down enough to be truly useful), and guesses as to why GW does or did things. I don’t foresee any meaningful consensus developing.

Though I would add that if GW only cared about chasing the market, they likely wouldn’t be doing something as niche as tabletop wargames in the first place. A company can’t be sustained by simply imitating market trends and chasing the biggest cut of the pie. See EA Games, WoTC, Universal Pictures, etc.

GW’s properties developed when they were a young and hungry company, forging a new path into an industry that really didn’t exist. That’s when Fantasy and 40k evolved into such strong and robust IP’s that so many people came to love.
Now that they’re a soulless publicly traded company, groaning under the weight of their own obligations, they’re reaping the benefits of that previous innovation.

People who think that GW’s recent successes are irrefutable evidence that they are doing things right, or that they have the best games, are ignoring the multiple forces at work behind the scenes that have absolutely nothing to do with the product itself.

The worst Blumhouse movie will make more money than the best independent horror movie. That’s how things work. The distributors control what is available to the consumer, and they have an incredible amount of say over audience ‘tastes’ by simple dint of controlling what’s out there. So don’t assume that just because more Skirmish games exist that it means that’s what people really want the most. It might be the case, but it’s not that simple.

Finally, as a consumer, I really couldn’t care less what the market wants. If GW takes a step with one of their games that I don’t approve of, in order to make it ‘mass-market’, I’m going to complain, regardless of how much business sense it might make or not. Telling hobbyists to “get over it” because everything in life has to somehow end up being marketed towards the largest number of people possible is a self-destructive philosophy.
I’m not just talking out of my ass, either, because there are many real-life examples of this occurring, such as Wizards’ epic failure with 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons, where they alienated their niche market and almost killed the brand.

I would rather have a modest company making quality products that I love, than some mega-corp making tons of money by selling bobbleheads and merch alongside half-baked skirmish games full of DLC and hidden costs.
The counter to this would be saying that GW has to make as much money as possible to survive, but this isn’t true. Warlord, Wyrd, Corvus Belli, Mantic, and others are all making solid games that are much better than anything GW is producing (in my opinion), without needing to destroy what makes them special by chasing market shares.

By encouraging the destruction of your hobby in the philosophy that we need every video and board gamer on the planet to join our community, you might discover that you don’t actually like what we all end up with.