I ought to clarify. My suggestion of a 'gesture of defiance' when SG goes offline was just that. We go to WHW and play some WM to show that we're not dead and gone. It's not a protest, we just do what we do and how they choose to interpret it is up to them. My guess is that it will be 'whatever ...' So, it's more of a funeral wake (ie. celebration of the life of) than a protest. And if we keep pitching up in the months and years to come to play informally, then we'll keep on celebrating the life of WM.
It will be interesting to see if we get turned away. As long as we deconflict with their big events, I don't see what complaint they can have? The only rule they seem to have is that only minis produced by GW can be used there, which is fair enough. If they won't let people play WM in the hall, will they also stop people playing BB in Bugman's?
Regarding what this all means for GW's overall strategy, I don't really have any insight on the underlying economics. But it does strike me that there are three life-stages to gamers: newbie, hobbyist, veteran. Yes, they might make lots of cash from teenage newbies but the serious hobbyists (multiple armies, playing in a club context) must also be a major revenue stream? But the club context that they progress into often relies on the veterans to provide the underlying organisational infrastructure. Yes, GW might not make much money from the veterans but they are important opinion formers and in a fickle community like gamers, you perhaps ought not alienate them? And at some stage the hobbyists become veterans themselves. It all seems very short-sighted. But I'm not one of their shareholders and so one can only spectate and ponder, I suppose.
