|
|
Post by Trooper One-Nine-Seven-Four on Jan 18, 2013 10:01:04 GMT -5
I just heard from someone I know who used to work at GW that Mark Wells is out as CEO, which essentially means that Tom Kirby can pretty much do whatever he pleases now... This webpage would seem to confirm, citing Kirby as "acting CEO" in addition to being chairman of the board of directors--although it doesn't have a date stating when it was last updated: investor.games-workshop.com/the-board-of-directors/ |
|
|
|
Post by BG. Foster on Jan 18, 2013 10:01:44 GMT -5
I saw the same news on another forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by KRIEGEIRK on Jan 18, 2013 10:07:32 GMT -5
Hopefully they get a little less fascist with the prices.  |
|
|
|
Post by emptyhat on Jan 18, 2013 10:15:49 GMT -5
I don't really know about either of these guys. what does this mean for the production of my little toy men?!  |
|
|
|
Post by Trooper One-Nine-Seven-Four on Jan 18, 2013 10:16:42 GMT -5
Hopefully they get a little less fascist with the prices. I doubt it--if anything, I suspect this bodes for further price increases... The hypothesis that was presented by other people whom my friend knows who also have worked/do work for GW is that Kirby is going to undertake a massive downsizing of positions in the company to generate a false impression of profits, generally trash GW, and then abscond with a golden parachute leaving the company broken in his wake...  |
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Jan 18, 2013 10:30:36 GMT -5
That's not what he intends to do. No one is that stupid. Evil and calculated? Yes. Stupid? No.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trooper One-Nine-Seven-Four on Jan 18, 2013 10:46:28 GMT -5
That's not what he intends to do. No one is that stupid. Evil and calculated? Yes. Stupid? No. The actions of former CEOs of several companies here in America, who helped precipitate the financial crisis, would tend to suggest otherwise. But then again this is Uhmerika... |
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Jan 18, 2013 11:04:07 GMT -5
The 'financial crisis' wasn't precipitated by CEO's taking the golden parachute. It was precipitated by an incursion of Necron computer viruses and Tau merchant Guilds conspiring to conquer the South Pole. All at the command of.... WILLIAM SHATNER!
In all seriousness, this is during the financial crisis and shareholders and board members alike will not let any single individual fornicate up their shares and/or jobs. They're more vigilant now.
Paradill
|
|
|
|
Post by vegna on Jan 18, 2013 11:23:14 GMT -5
I don't really know about either of these guys. what does this mean for the production of my little toy men?! my first thought  and i think this means we need to get a commissar in to GWS and to watch over his shoulder while maintaining his bolt pistol while humming to himself "i like shooting CEOs, CEOs, CEOs..." |
|
Sgt. Rock
Captain
Loungin' like a lizard.
Posts: 231
|
Post by Sgt. Rock on Jan 18, 2013 11:25:37 GMT -5
I'm with Paradill on this one. Kirby's been with the company for 27 years now, and while I know there's no such thing as loyalty among thieves corporate executives, if he's that entrenched, I doubt he's going to eff up such a good thing. He used to be a tax inspector, too... I dunno what the tax system is like in the UK, but it means that while he knows what they look for, and potentially the loopholes to sneak through, he also knows what's in store if he gets caught. No idea what that might be, but hey, it's something, right? I really don't think any CEOs are going to try and take another shot at that kind of thing, not after it tanked the global economy like it did. I'd like to think the Brits learned from our mistakes. And let's be honest, he's *acting* CEO. That means they're not necessarily planning on keeping him there. They might, they might not. Hard to say. At the end of all this, just remember the words of the Good Book... Don't Panic. I seriously doubt our toy soldiers are in any danger. |
|
|
|
Post by emptyhat on Jan 18, 2013 11:33:06 GMT -5
I don't really know about either of these guys. what does this mean for the production of my little toy men?! my first thought and i think this means we need to get a commissar in to GWS and to watch over his shoulder while maintaining his bolt pistol while humming to himself "i like shooting CEOs, CEOs, CEOs..." Reds for Commissar No Man! |
|
|
|
Post by Adkenpachi on Jan 18, 2013 12:32:54 GMT -5
It doesnt matter how long hes been there, if he wants to retire he could do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ponen19 on Jan 18, 2013 15:17:04 GMT -5
I would like to say that because he's been there for awhile he'll try and take good care of the company, but business people have a tendency to think about how much they can gain individually over how much the company can gain. And if he does just fire a bunch of people in an attempt to "raise" profits, most shareholders only see the increase profit, not the number of unemployed they had to step over to make it happen.
Fortunately there is a silver lining to this if the worst does happen, well a couple really. If GW were to tank, the IP would most likely be bought up pretty quick by another model/game company (Mantic and Wizard of the Coast come to mind but that's probably just wishful thinking). Also, The game itself is not dependent on the models, just the rule book and codex's. While it unfortunate that we couldn't get an update for most of them, the current 'dexs would still be useable for a bit until someone buys the rights and releases all new ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trooper One-Nine-Seven-Four on Jan 20, 2013 18:12:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dougeye on Jan 22, 2013 6:48:45 GMT -5
haha i love the fact who ever sold those shares is based in the caimen islands, mabye gw as a whole are doing a starbucks and tax dodging eplaining the rumours in my thread about more price rises to cover the tax bill |
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Jan 22, 2013 7:04:40 GMT -5
It's not tax dodging, it's the immediate reduction of unnecessary loss of income through intelligent relocation of assets.
|
|
|
|
Post by dougeye on Jan 22, 2013 7:29:33 GMT -5
exactly, dont get me wrong if i had a business i would avoid as much tax as possible, i firmly object to funding people who have never worked and don't know what contraception is. I would rather keep the money in the business and create more jobs then people like the above dont have the excuse of there being no jobs. The more you tax business the less they will invest, swings and round abouts either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Jan 22, 2013 7:57:25 GMT -5
Equally it takes away from people like me, who can't work and have a family. I worked all my life until August.
|
|
|
|
Post by dougeye on Jan 22, 2013 8:11:40 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong i have no problem with someone who needs benefits because of their situation, especially when they have worked all their life like yourself. I object to healthy young men and women who have never worked and have no intention of doing so and think having kids is a good idea just for benefits. i know its a contentious issue as their are winners and loosers on both sides. I dont for one minute think people should be dodging tax completly no ways but business rates should be kept as low as possible as i believe breaks like this help to provide employment, + the wages those new employees earn will have tax taken off and go back into the system. you either have fat cats not employing people and taking business to the far east etc because of high business rates or lower business rate and 1) more people in work and 2) the tax being spread around through the employment of staff. wrong thread for this debate i know lol As an example Philip Green, always in the news for not paying his "personal taxes" because he is non domocile (i think thats the word). one of my extended family works high up in his company dealing with finance and he assures me that in terms of business rates and the tax paid from wages in the company we are talking millions of pounds every week from that company. I admit the situation with Mr green himself is not 100% coshe (but it is legal) but hey its not the reason the economy is failing. End of Rant lol i don't want to comment about this issue again in this thread as i know its the wrong place for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegna on Jan 22, 2013 8:53:29 GMT -5
can we get off the tax system and back on to the topic at hand: Does this mean there's a job going high up in GWS? |
|
|
|
Post by syphon on Jan 24, 2013 12:15:23 GMT -5
I'll take the GW CEO position.
First order of business: Find a balance between what customers get and what customers pay. Because the current situation sure ain't it. I mean, people with rich parents or rich people will keep buying it, but as a student, even I am starting to lose my interest in plastic men. All because of the ridiculous difference between box contents and price.
|
|
|
|
Post by dougeye on Jan 24, 2013 12:33:41 GMT -5
i am also a student and i have recently over the last few months started collecting again so i have spent more than i should have but apart from forge world specific models 95% of what i bought has been from independants offering discount. if they did not exist i would still have spent the same amount on 40k but i would have less models to show for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paradill on Jan 24, 2013 12:55:04 GMT -5
I will only like a CEO that wears power armour instead of a suit and carries an Aquila staff instead of a briefcase.
Their policies are gonna hurt us nuts eaters no matter what
|
|
|
|
Post by Trooper One-Nine-Seven-Four on Jan 25, 2013 12:13:46 GMT -5
Food for thought here: www.belloflostsouls.net/2013/01/editorial-of-gw-ceos-and-shares.htmlBased on the thread I followed from my friend who I got the initial information of Wells leaving from, and some responses posted to it from their friends who would still seem to be associated with GW, I got the impression that Wells did not leave of his own accord. However, take with salt--I am inferring this just from the tone of a few responses... |
|
