Take the two headline numbers from Games Workshop’s annual report and divide one by the other. Revenue of £659.7 million, pre-tax profit of £275.7 million. That is a pre-tax margin of 41.8%.
For a company that manufactures plastic and resin miniatures in Nottingham, packs them into boxes and ships them around the world, that figure is the story. It is a margin more commonly associated with software than with injection moulding.
Both revenue and profit were records for the 52 weeks to 31 May 2026, as reported by East Midlands Business Link, up from £617.5 million and £262.8 million respectively.
Where a margin like that comes from
Manufacturers do not usually earn 40% before tax. The reason Games Workshop does is that it is not really competing on manufacturing.
The company owns the intellectual property, designs the models, makes them, and sells a large share of them through its own shops and website. Each of those steps would ordinarily be a separate business taking a separate margin. Holding all of them means the difference between the cost of the plastic and the price on the box accrues in one place.
Owning the IP is the part that does the heavy lifting. A manufacturer producing someone else’s design competes on price, because the buyer can move the tooling elsewhere. A company producing the only Space Marines there are does not have that problem, and its pricing is bounded by what customers will pay rather than by what a rival will quote.
The hobby’s structure reinforces it. Customers who have invested years in an army are unlikely to switch to a competing system, because the models they already own would not transfer. That is a switching cost the customer built themselves, and it is more durable than most forms of brand loyalty.
The margin actually fell
The record headline conceals a small movement worth noting. Revenue grew 6.8% while pre-tax profit grew 4.9%, so the margin slipped from 42.6% to 41.8%.
That is not a deterioration in the business, and at this level it barely registers. But it is the direction that matters over time, because a company earning above 40% attracts competitors, cost inflation and the ordinary gravity that pulls exceptional margins back toward average ones. Eight tenths of a percentage point in one year is noise. The same movement repeated for a decade is a different company.
Part of the explanation is disclosed. Licensing revenue declined, which the company had expected, because the prior year contained what it described as a “surprise but very positive” product release. Licensing income arrives lumpily, since it depends on when video games and other adaptations ship rather than on how many boxes leave Nottingham, and a strong comparative year makes the following one look weaker without anything going wrong.
Kevin Rountree, the chief executive, attributed the record to the core business rather than to licensing: “We delivered Group revenue and profit before tax at record levels thanks to another good performance from the core business.”
The record year came with concrete
The most revealing detail in the results is not financial. It is the property.
Factory 4 at Lenton, a 49,500 sq ft addition to the company’s Nottingham manufacturing site, had its major construction work largely completed during the period and was handed over to the business in July. Separately, the company agreed a pre-let on a 250,000 sq ft warehouse at VGP Park East Midlands.
Those two commitments say more about management’s expectations than any forward-looking statement would. A quarter of a million square feet of warehousing is a bet that volumes keep rising, and it is an expensive bet to be wrong about, because warehouse leases do not shrink when demand does.
It is also a decision to keep manufacturing in Britain. A company with these margins could plausibly outsource production to lower-cost countries and improve them further. Building a fourth factory in Nottingham instead is a choice to keep the process, the tooling and the quality control in one place, close to the design teams.
That runs against the prevailing direction in UK manufacturing, where energy costs and competitiveness have pushed firms to question whether to invest here at all. Games Workshop is not energy-intensive in the way steel is, so the calculation is different. But the decision to add capacity domestically is still a vote of some confidence.
What vertical integration costs
Owning every stage of the chain produces the margin, and it is worth being clear that it also carries the risks a more fragmented competitor avoids.
A company that outsources manufacturing can reduce orders when demand softens, because the factory belongs to someone else and the cost falls away. A company that owns four factories cannot. Tooling, buildings and the people who run them are fixed costs, and in a downturn they continue whether or not anything is selling. The same is true of the retail estate: a shop is a lease, and a lease does not respond to a bad quarter.
That is the trade being made. In good years, vertical integration captures margin that would otherwise be shared with a contract manufacturer, a distributor and a retailer. In bad ones it converts what would have been someone else’s problem into an unavoidable cost base. The strategy amplifies results in both directions, which is why it looks like brilliance during an expansion and like exposure during a contraction.
Adding 49,500 sq ft of factory and pre-letting 250,000 sq ft of warehouse increases that exposure deliberately. It is a reasonable decision on a decade of growth, and it is also the decision that would hurt most if the hobby’s participation levelled off. Fixed costs are added quickly and removed slowly.
None of this is a criticism of the results, which are genuinely excellent. It is the reason a 41.8% margin is not simply free money: it is compensation for carrying operational risk that most manufacturers deliberately push onto somebody else.
Why nobody has copied it
An obvious question follows from a 41.8% margin: why has a competitor not taken it?
Others have tried, and rival miniature systems exist. What they cannot easily replicate is four decades of accumulated fiction. The Warhammer settings have been developed since the 1980s across models, rulebooks, novels and games, and that body of material is what makes a customer care which faction they collect. A competitor can copy the manufacturing process in a year. The reason anyone wants a particular model took much longer to build.
The company’s own retail estate compounds it. Stores staffed by people who play the games function as recruitment for the hobby rather than as pure distribution, and they are difficult to justify economically for anyone who has not already reached scale.
The genuine risk is not competition but attention. Rountree’s framing was that “Games Workshop and the Warhammer hobby are in great shape”, and the second half of that sentence is the load-bearing one. The business depends on a hobby continuing to attract new participants, and hobbies are subject to fashion in a way that industrial products are not.
What the numbers are evidence of
British manufacturing rarely produces a story shaped like this. Most of the sector’s good news this year has been about volumes holding up, exports steadying or a decline slowing, against a backdrop where three quarters of what Britain builds now leaves the country and margins are set by global competition.
Games Workshop is the exception because it is not selling a commodity. It is selling something only it can make, manufactured here for reasons of control rather than cost, at a price set by demand rather than by a tender.
The record is real and the margin is remarkable. The thing to watch is whether the next set of results shows the margin holding at these levels or continuing its small drift down, because that number, rather than the revenue line, is what makes this company unusual.
About The Author
More Stories
Lucky Egg Grew Sales 515% to Top Britain’s Growth 100
One Month of Leadership Changes Hit John Lewis, NEXT, ASOS and Puma
Clients Placed £1.2bn Fewer Construction Orders in a Quarter