As others have said, losing customers but the customers who remain spend more isn't an ideal business model and ultimately I can't see as being sustainable for a product like GW sells.
While I can give respect to GW upper management for increasing profits and being good at their jobs from a shareholder perspective I don't think that it is in the ultimate best interests of the company to put shareholders as the number 1 priority. At the moment GW can act this way because they have a significant hold on the market. That will change. 8 years ago I have never heard of any other war game than GW ones, now I can rattle of 10 probably off the top of my head, 4 of which I'm very tempted to get into but won't because of the backlog of GW related projects I have. When those are finished will I look to other systems? Yes I will. Not because I am bored of the 40k or FB 'verse (I'm as interested in it as ever) but because of GW's business policies. Not necessarily the price (because other systems will no doubt be of a similar buy into price) but because of the way that GW is focusing on shareholder as number 1 and not an equal focus on customer loyalty and shareholder growth and after all what causes shareholder growth? Customer base, which, while spending more per customer, is not growing and is decreasing. That is not good for a business because it is relying on customer loyalty which can be lost (and is being lost).
The local GW manager made this comment the other day when the subject of Infinity and GW's superior range of plastic, multipart kits came up: "They are where GW was 20 years ago", well Infinity's posing and model quality is far far far superior to GW's minis from 20 years ago but I know what he means and agree, no other company has such an extensive range of customisable kits as GW. At the moment. That will change and in the future as other companies expand their ranges and grow in size I think GW will find themselves having to face a realisation that shareholder returns are going to drop as a result of their "shareholder #1 at all costs" policy that they currently have. It may not happen tomorrow but if their current business practice continues it will happen. Asking a diminishing customer group to pay 10% more per product per year when the customer's income is not increasing at 10% or more is not a recipe for success ultimately.