@greyhunter the difference between GW and “the worst Blumhouse movie” of course is that GW’s profits sank massively bottoming out in, I think, 2015.  The evidence that they’re doing something right is not the profits they are making as much as it is the growth they have seen in profits in the last 2-3 years.  They have increased sales massively, so that is evidence that they are doing something right.  They are either winning back old customers, winning new customers or both and they are doing so by selling people something that they want to buy.  If that isn’t doing something right then I really don’t know what is.  And omparing GW’s sales to Corvus Belli or Privateer Press is also an invalid comparison. All three comps have to make enough money to cover their costs, one of which is wages. GW’s wage bill would be, somewhere between 50 and 100 times that of Corvus Belli for example. Overall GW’s costs are higher too so they are absolutely required to sell vastly more stock than either Corvus Belli or Privateer Press to remain solvent

I also wasn’t aware that anyone has said categorically that GW’s product is better or worse than anyone else, neither in terms of rules or models, that’s really your own personal preference.

As for marketing to the largest number, D&D 4 failed because it made massive changes to win over new customers – always a risk as we also saw with Age of Sigmar.  However the difference between the two is that Age of Sigmar was still trying to market, however ineptly, to the same market – wargamers.  D&D 4 tried to win over video gamers and that’s where it lost most of its following.  GW is a large business and they have to sell products in certain volumes in order to survive and that means, simply, that they won’t waste time or resources on products that won’t make a decent return.  And given that the question was “what would you do if you were in charge of Games Workshop”,  I would say that adequately explains why the discussion is so focused on the things GW are likely to do (or not) and has not been about small, indy companies.   But it’s not about selling to the largest audience but pleasing the largest share of a specific audience.  If it were about selling to the largest audience all businesses would be selling food or energy – things that every person needs rather than things that some people want.  Thankfully that’s not the way economics works.

I also don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect, after 4 years, that maybe some of the butthurt about cancelling WFB would have eased off by now (seriously folks, get some canesten for that).  Most people get over the death of a loved one quicker than that.  Invading a discussion about the direction you would like to see with a load of piss and wind about how Age of Sigmar is the worst decision ever is, in all honesty, likely to attract the contempt it deserves.  You totally have every right to feel any way you want about Warhammer Fantasy Battle or anything else, but air that opinion in public and it’s only reasonable to expect people to give you their thoughts on that, including but not limited to being told to get over it.  Telling people to basically get over it will have precisely zero impact on GW or their sales.  It may or may not cause someone to reassess their opinion, it may or may not cause them to think twice about where they voice it in future.  I don’t really mind either way.  The worst that happens is nothing changes and the same people with the same tired complaints continue to be unhappy.  The best that happens is some of might heed the advice and move on to new and dare I say better games and actually find some happiness.