The kitchen is on fire. Welcome to the final part of the Vapiano story where the tables are turning. In the first two episodes we followed Mark Korzilius' journey from setbacks to founding Vapiano, a groundbreaking restaurant concept, highlighting its fresh ingredients, dynamic atmosphere, and data-driven operations that drove rapid success. While achieving initial profitability and garnering attention from industry giants like McDonald's, Vapiano's global expansion has led to stellar revenue growth. However, it has also resulted in the emergence of numerous side projects (or distractions), operational challenges, increased costs, significant investments, and a notable accumulation of debt. This underscores the prioritization of top-line growth over profitable growth. We will continue on this thread and see how the story ends, but I would encourage you to read part one and two for better context. Vapiano P1: Italian Food Made in Germany (substack.com). Let's dig in.
Before Going Public
We are now in 2015 and the year is a disaster for Vapiano's PR department. Employee time stamps are being manipulated, endless overtime for employees and high turnover in managerial roles are reported; mice in the kitchen and even rotten food allegedly found.
The company is confronted with allegations of exceeding working hours among trainees in an article published by Welt am Sonntag, while the same outlet accuses Vapiano of manipulating punch times. The auditing firm PwC is commissioned to investigate the allegations and finds that there is no systematic approach but rather misconduct by individual employees, a mistake that’s being corrected. Internal however, investigations into stamp times are carried out regularly now and beyond its obvious reputational impact, this sucks up valuable management time and attention.
In the summer of 2015 CEO, co-founder and investor Gregor Gerlach, who has been running the group since 2011 is stepping down and Jochen Halfmann is taking over. A new Vapiano People Program with an App is being developed with the aim to better interact with customers that will incorporate innovate features such as mobile pay. The German website sees a launch of new magazine to further promote the brand and there is now a full inhouse blogger and Instagram team being installed. In October the company buys seven restaurants from original co-founder, former co-investor and ex-president previously responsible for internation expansion Kent Hahne (2x Bonn, 3x Cologne, 1x Koblenz and one in Cologne that’s under construction). This package of Vapiano restaurants is very successful and generates net sales of more than 20 million euros in 2014. Hahne opened his first Vapiano restaurant in Cologne in August 2006 and in 2015 with his company apeiron AG, Hahne operates six L'Osteria franchise restaurants, a direct Vapiano competitor, and two self-owned restaurants GinYuu.
Then in November of 2015, the next public relations bomb goes off with allegations regarding the company's quality standards. The company immediately investigates the issue through internal and external specialists but finds no evidence of any quality issues. Nevertheless, knowing that the group is now being closely watched, the company’s already in place hygiene standards are being reinforced. Additional audits and inspections are performed nationally. Further, all Vapianos worldwide are being audited twice by the partners SGS Institut Fresenius and SAI Global. Auditing software is purchased to simplify the implementation of the audits and the resulting measures. Apart from the external examinations, there is a food sampling plan in place being performed continuously. Again, all of this sucks up costs, management time and attention. With all these tumultuous developments the company’s growth engine is undeterred. Revenue grows by a whopping 50 million euros to 202 million euros, an increase of 33%. Impressive. While average spent per customer increases in all countries, the number of customers per day in Germany decreases by 3.3% partially due to the negative press towards the end of the year. Five own, four JV and 19 new franchise restaurants are added that year to the group, the total number of own managed restaurants grows to 51, there are 31 JVs and 84 franchises which bringing the total to 166 Vapiano restaurants. Global restaurant sales are now above 400 million euros.
But while revenue grows by an astronomical 50 million euros, operating profits, alarmingly, shrink again. Gross margins are staying perfectly healthy above 75% but operating costs keep growing disproportionately fast. The Company’s outstanding debt jumps by almost 30 million, close to 85 million euros by the end of the year. With operating profits at 9.5 million euros, alarm bells should be going off right now.
In Q4 of 2015, new CEO Jochen Halfmann introduces Strategy 2020. The new strategy includes five essential points. One, profitable growth in the newly defined core markets of Germany and Austria as well as in the UK, Netherlands, France and USA. Two, operational excellence through strict “best practice” management. Three, further development and digitalization of the concept considering guest feedback. Four, greater focus on long-term employee retention and five, building a modern and sustainable IT landscape. Sound’s good on paper but let’s see how things pan out.
Vapiano's investments (capital expenditures) that year are primarily directed towards new restaurant openings, renovations of existing establishments, and share acquisitions in other Vapiano restaurants from franchisees or JV partners. A significant portion of funds is allocated to the digitalization of the guest experience, including the development of a new app scheduled for market release in 2016 and the implementation of a time recording system across all group restaurants. The world's first standalone Vapiano restaurant with a delivery service that year is built in Fürth, Germany. The company keeps expanding its presence in both inner-city locations and international markets, such as Shanghai, China.
To finance all of this, the group has its own operating cash flow which comes in at 18 million while capital expenditures are 26 million euros plus 14 million for acquisitions. The funding gab is filled with 26 million euros of new debt and a seven-million-euro equity raise. At that end of the year and after the equity raise Gregor Gerlach (through his AP Leipzig GmbH & Co. KG entity) holds 30.1%, Hans-Joachim and Gisa Sander through their Exchange Bio GmbH hold 25.5% and the Tchibo heirs, Herz through their Mayfair Beteiligungsfonds II GmbH & Co. KG hold 44,4%.
But for the first time the restaurant’s concept that was so successful to date is being questioned. Some customers are starting to mislike the operational flow of the concept itself. If you want pasta, you must queue for pasta. If you want pizza you stand in a different queue. A small side salad, yet another queue. "You spend more time carrying trays than an actress in Berlin-Mitte. The audience in the pasta limbo can only consist of people who have worked for an insurance company for a long time and, like Stockholm syndrome, they can no longer get away from the industrial canteen feeling," writes TV host Beisenherz provocatively. While overly harsh in his assessment he's not entirely wrong judging by customers venting their frustrations in forums and social media channels. It isn’t uncommon for those who ordered pizza to have already finished eating while there is little movement in the pasta queue. Long term that doesn't go down well, QSRs competitors like L’Osteria are handling this process differently, with much success.
https://preview.redd.it/6cas01oked0d1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=2da6e0b4bc0e07dbee558de412feb414cd598d4a

Tipping Point

Where are now in the year 2016 and things start to deteriorate visibility. Perhaps not for the leman’s eye but any business minded observer can see that there are problems under the hood. Yes, revenue grows yet another whopping 50 million to almost 250 million euros but half of that growth, comes from acquisitions of restaurants that the group didn’t already own 100%, which is now being fully consolidated within the group’s accounts. Here is a concrete example. In the past, Vapiano SE, the group’s top holding company held an indirect 50% stake in a French subgroup via the subsidiary VAP Restaurants SA, based in Luxembourg, and included this as an associated company in the Vapiano SE consolidated financial statements using the equity method. Due to the acquisition of additional shares in September of 2016, Vapiano SE's indirect share in the French subgroup increased to 75%. This means that Vapiano SE takes control of the French subgroup, which is therefore included in the group’s financial statements as part of the full consolidation. The revenue from the acquired subsidiary now recorded in the consolidated income statement amounts to 12.8 million euros. While that’s great for the top line, the loss of the fully consolidated entity equates to 0.2 million euros. Yes, you are buying revenue, but there are losses attached to them, not profits. A similar case is the Swedish entity that runs eight restaurants with revenue of 11.5 million euros but has losses of 235 thousand euros. So much for Strategy 2020 and “profitable” growth.
That year the group’s operating profits are absolutely tanking, halving to 3.5 million euros. Operating profits are now a mere 1,4% of revenue. Remember original founder Mark Korzilius who talked about operating margins of 25% to 28% at the restaurant level? Yes, there are overhead costs for the organization that sits above the chain of restaurants, but operating margins that low indicates a course correction is needed. What’s telling is that in the annual report, in the management discussion section, the company starts talking about EBITDA as a proxy measure of profitability, rather than operating profit or net income. This wasn’t the case in the years before. Is this window dressing for an upcoming IPO? EBITDA is short for earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization. How can you measure profitability of a restaurant chain that absolutely and unequivocally needs capital investment to maintain its restaurant operations, the very source of cash generation, by simply excluding this maintenance charge (depreciation in the income statement)? Vapiano’s own annual report talks about the fact that existing restaurants must be rejuvenated from time to time and that new interior designs have to be implemented every few years. These things wear and tear, they go out of style, kitchen equipment breaks and needs replacement. This business absolutely needs maintenance capital expenditure, why anyone talks of profits before these maintenance costs is beyond me. Fun fact: in the previous annual report EBITDA is mentioned seven times, mostly around restaurant acquisitions and financing, not however as a profit indication for the group. In the new annual report, EBITDA is mentioned 28 times. Maybe it’s just me but belated Charlie Munger liked to call EBITDA: bullsh*t earnings. When in doubt I stick with Charlie. Interestingly, EBITDA for Vapiano keeps growing while operating and net profits keep falling.
Operating cashflow for the group that year is about 21 million euros, but capital expenditure is 30 million and acquisitions for subsidiaries another 20 million. To finance these expenditures another 28 million euros of debt and 16 million of equity is raised. Net debt rises above 130 million euro. The operating cashflow of the group before any capital expenditures is 21 million euros. I am not sure free cash flow would be significantly positive after maintenance capex is paid out; it’s not broken out so we can’t be sure. Granted, I am not on the ground during this time, and I am not in the board room, I am simply reading what’s in front of me, but to me this is starting to look like a distressed situation. Regardless, the following year the company goes public.

IPO

Where are now in the year 2017 and its Vapiano’s first year as public company. The company’s annual report reads the following “Sales revenue, like-for-like growth (LfL) and the earnings figures EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA are used as the most important financial performance indicators for controlling operational business activities.” The very same report however also says: “The majority of the group's investments regularly go towards opening new restaurant locations and modernizing existing restaurants. The latter are differentiated into regular replacement investments that occur during ongoing operations (Maintenance CAPEX) and fundamental investments in the renovation of a restaurant (Remodeling CAPEX). On average, a restaurant remodeling takes place nine years after opening.” It says it right there in their own report; every nine years a remodeling is taking place. Remodeling and updating is not cost free, so why exclude depreciation charges which reflect capital expenditures? I understand that perhaps you would want to strip out one-off opening costs, that’s fine and fair, but don’t go overboard.
The number of restaurants increases by 26 (previous year: 13) to a total of 205. The increase consists of 27 new openings and one closure. Group revenue grows to an astonishing 325 million euros but here comes the shocker, operating profits turn negative to 25 million. Fine, strip out foreign exchange losses of 3 million, IPO costs of 5.8 million and new opening costs of 6.1 million and you still have 10 million euros of operational losses. All the while the debt load of almost 130 million hasn’t materially changed, so those operating losses are before a six-million-euro interest payment. 184 million euros are raised through the IPO of which 85 million go to the company. This money is earmarked for further expansion as the group has ambitions to almost double the footprint to 330 restaurants by the end of 2020. The company is currently not profitable on an operating basis, and still wants to expand aggressively? I don’t get it. The remaining 100 million euros of the IPO money raised is distributed to co-founder Gregor Gerlach and Wella heirs Hans-Joachim and Gisa Sander. The family office of the former Tchibo owners Günter and Daniela Herz with a 44% stake, don’t sell a single share. After the IPO, 32% of all the company’s shares are now in free float.
One year later, in 2018, things get even worse. Revenue grows to 371 million, but operating losses mount to 85 million euros, that’s before interest expenses of 9 million. Even the beloved EBITDA figure turns negative, meaning the operating business before any expansionary or even maintenance capital expenditures is loss making. All regions are experiencing significant deterioration in their earnings profiles. Like for like sales are down 1% across the board. That’s revenue, not profitability. The question naturally arises: is the Group approaching its natural saturation point here or this operational by nature? The operating cash flow is now 9 million while financing cost are close to 7 million. That leaves 2 million for maintenance capital for 74 own restaurants and 76 joint ventures ones. Describing this as financially tight, would be an understatement.
Things are not looking good at this point. Yet the company still grows restaurants by 26 new sites. 64 million euros are spent on acquisitions, new openings, and maintenance costs, financed through a 20 million-euro equity raise and 72 million of new debt. The Company now has net debt outstanding of over 160 million euros. After the equity raise and by the end of the year 2018, Mayfair owns 47.4%, VAP Leipzig, Gregor Gerlach’s entity owns 18.9% and the Sander couple own 15.5% of the company. Yes, the Sanders and Gerlach may have taken 100 million euros off the table, but they still have substantial skin in the game. Plus, Mayfair hasn’t sold a single share and instead injects more money into the company through the equity round. The stock has now fallen from its IPO price of 23 euros per share to under 6 euros by the end of 2018. Something must be done here. And indeed, there is pivot in strategy and a hard push for change. At last, the management team abandons its aggressive growth plan and curtails new openings significantly. Additionally, the team wants to run a thorough analysis of weak locations to then either discontinue or sell sites. In Europe, the operating focus will be put on corporate restaurants and joint ventures in major cities to ensure the ideal size and location to match the respective demographic target group. Outside of Europe, the franchising business is being expanded and at the same time a consolidation of the existing corporate and joint venture markets is being sought. All future investments will be reviewed to achieve higher rates of returns on new openings. Investments are also being made in the renovation of older restaurants. The goal in the future is to also open smaller formats, like Mini-Vapianos (less than 400 square meters) or Freestander at prominent transportation hubs outside city centers (currently in Fürth and Toulouse) to cater to individual location requirements, and to enter new partnerships. I am not sure why management hasn’t stopped all expansion altogether, bringing the ship in order first, getting profitable, clean up, all hands-on deck before considering any further expansions whatsoever. But again, it’s easy to comment from the sidelines; maybe they saw white spaces that would be covered by competing concepts if they weren’t moving fast and aggressively enough. Although pushing internationally means competing with local players such as Jamie's Italian, Prezzo, Pizza Express, Wagamama, Nando's and many more which brings in its own dynamic.
Management also aims to enhance guest satisfaction. This involves refining operational processes, reorganizing the support center, and refocusing on the core offering: providing fresh and high-quality Italian food at affordable prices for a broad audience. The group also aims to reduce waiting times, especially during lunch, while also improving the evening atmosphere. There is even what I would call an evolution, away from Vapiano’s original concept, reorientating the customer journey. The ordering flow is being changed, offering guests synchronized preparations of all dishes while eliminating wait times at the cooking stations. The open show kitchen remains, staying true to original mantra of freshness and transparency but now guests can choose their preferred method of ordering through a mobile app, using a digital order point (kiosk), or by personally placing an order with a waiter. Guests can still freely choose their table and are then informed about the complete preparation of their order through a pager or their smartphone. This is a substantial deviation from the original concept, but a needed one. The group is also exploring and implementing the expansion of take-away and home delivery services but only at suitable locations, not universally across new openings. I am not sure why home delivery is even a priority here; it adds operational complexity. It’s better to clean up shop first and get back to the basics before adding new complexities. To be fair management does try to simplify. There are 49 different permanent dishes on the menu and additional 10 seasonal ones. Customers can choose from eleven different types of pasta. There is simply too much choice, and it makes orders complicated. The company announced to slim the menu down to its most popular and typical Vapiano dishes. There’s no need for an Asian salad at an Italian restaurant. "We have to go back to the roots, i.e. classic, honest Italian cuisine" says COO Everke. Regardless, in November of 2018, the supervisory board pulls the plug on CEO Jochen Halfmann and replaces him with Cornelius Everke. Everke himself has just become COO five months ago. Since 2017 he was responsible for international expansion. From 2011 to 2017 that role was filled by Mario Bauer – put a pin in that name, he’ll play a key role in the groups fate later. Then nine months later, in the middle of 2019, Cornelius Everke quits. He essentially concludes that his skillset and experience in the areas of internation expansion is no longer needed in the foreseeable future. To put it differently: Vapiano has moved from a growth story and has become a restructuring case, and other skills are required for that job. In June of 2019 Everke says the following “(we’ve) made a bit of a mistake when it came to foreign expansion”. No sh#t. Vapiano postpones the presentation of the 2018 annual financial statements three times in the spring of 2019, citing negotiations over an urgently needed loan of 30 million euros. It’s not until the end of May that a binding loan commitment comes through from the financing banks and major shareholders.
We are now in August of 2019 and the corona pandemic is just around the corner. Supervisory board chief Vanessa Hall takes over as interim-CEO and things are unravelling. Visitor numbers are declining; originally, it was planned to sell the US business but halfway through the year the buyer cannot come up with the money. But not all restaurants are performing poorly. The group's poor figures contrast starkly as an example with the experiences of the Swiss-German franchisee, who runs six restaurants. The Sodano family in Switzerland pays Vapiano a royalty of 6% of sales for the use of the brand. Enrico Sodano explains in an interview that they operate largely autonomously from the licensor. If an “accident” were to occur, he could immediately replace the Vapiano sign with Sodano, he says. The family concluded the rents and contracts with employees and suppliers independently. The Sodano family have six locations in Bern, Basel and Zurich, around one million guests every year and 350 employees. Things are going well on the ground. The delivery service they’ve built is offering them a second income stream. Expansion into Winterthur, St. Gallen and Lucerne are being planned; small locations with 150 to 250 square meters and an attached delivery service. Originally, Vapiano restaurants used to be huge but for such a large restaurant to be profitable, 800 to 1,000 guests per day are needed. That’s possible in medium-sized cities, but not in smaller towns which is why the Vapiano group now also supports smaller formats. Back to our corporate drama. The 2019 annual report would be the last report the group files. By the end 2019 the outstanding debt of the company is at an astronomical 450 million euros. Revenue has grown by another 7%, produced by four net new openings through two JVs and two franchise restaurants but operating losses come in at 317 million euros. That sound like an absolute shocker at first but depreciation and amortization charges are 345 million, so that operating cash flow is actually positive but unfortunately capital expenditures and interest payments are so large that they are eating up all of the company’s operating cash flow. Then in the beginning of 2020 Corona hits with full force and the world shuts down. As a result of the measures to prevent further spreading of the virus, the group is forced to cease all global business operations (except in Sweden). While all these shutdowns are happening, the group is the middle of negotiating with its lending banks and main shareholders. There are additional financing needs for restructuring measures, even without a pandemic happening in the background. The situation is so dire that the company starts pleading to the German government to roll out the package of financial help more quickly. Unfortunately, it’s to no end. The rapid closure of restaurants and the resulting lack of operating cash inflows in conjunction with the additional financing requirements, lead to the company’s final knockout punch. In April of 2020, the Vapiano group officially files for insolvency proceedings. The end of an era.

New Beginnings

Because of the pandemic, the majority of the group's subsidiaries in Austria, the Netherlands, Denmark, the United States, Sweden, and China also file for insolvency or seek liquidation. The US business never gets sold in the end and is wound down. In the summer of 2020, significant group divestments occur, including the sale of 75% shares in the group's French subsidiaries, shares in franchisor companies, Australian subsidiaries, German subsidiaries, associated companies, self-managed restaurants in Germany, and insolvency-related sales in the Netherlands, Great Britain, and Sweden. The buyer of the Vapiano brand and one of these bundles of Vapiano restaurants is company named Love & Food Restaurant Holding, a consortium led by Mario C. Bauer – a name I told you to remember. Bauer was a former Vapiano board member and led the national and international expansion, opening 200 sites in 33 countries from 2011 to 2017 until he was succeeded by Cornelius Everke. Bauer didn’t feel comfortable with the IPO at the time but clearly has a lot of managerial and entrepreneurial talent.
The buyer consortium is an absolute A-Team comprised of European QSR top league hitters, including the founder of the Pret A Manger chain Sinclair Beecham; Henry McGovern, the founder and Ex-CEO of the giant international restaurant and foodservice operator AmRest; the Van der Valk Family that runs hotels and Vapiano restaurants in the Netherlands, and co-founder and ex-CEO Gregor Gerlach. The acquisition value is 15 million euros and entails 30 Vapiano restaurants in Germany, albeit that’s just the purchase price which comes on top of any capital investment needed to refresh and return the sites to its former glory. Nevertheless, just as a thought experiment, if you can get each site to 2 million euros of revenue and 400,000 euros in operating profit on average, which wouldn’t be an overly aggressively assumption given the company’s history, you’ve got yourself a package that can deliver restaurant-level operating profits of 12 million euros or more. It’s not disclosed how much capex was needed to refresh the operations, just that fact that the overall investment plus purchase price was a middle double-digit million-euro figure. Stil, it probably was a decent purchase. The same consortium buys Vapiano’s French business for 25 million euros just two weeks prior. After the transaction concludes, the master franchise is given to Delf Neumann and his Gastro & Soul GmbH. Neumann is an experienced operator, and he is ambitious to revitalise the brand with new services and products. For example, instead of pizza, the restaurants will be serving pinsa - a flatbread made from sourdough, wheat and rice flour, topped similarly to a pizza. It targets a more health-oriented customer base looking for a less calory heavy option. The menu overall is expanded by including a variety of vegan and vegetarian dishes.
https://preview.redd.it/kpt7ea6red0d1.png?width=1242&format=png&auto=webp&s=c9930ced85ee364e9df414547cae06b47a03fc19
Today Neumann’s Gastro & Soul GmbH operates 18 Vapianos on its own account and has 29 franchise sites, amongst other brands. By the year 2021, Vapiano operates 191 restaurants in 34 countries. This is around 50 fewer sites than before the bankruptcy. The number of branches is particularly thinned out in Germany – from 80 to 55. Nevertheless, Vapiano's home country remains by far the largest market, followed by France with 35 restaurants and Austria with 15 locations. “We have shrunk ourselves to health,” says Bauer in the aftermath and there is no further shrinking planned. Quite the opposite, the smell of expansion is in the air again – pun intended. Not as aggressively as before and with a new menu and ordering process.
Overall, the team around Bauer is filled with industry experts with knowledge and networks gained over decades who have a great track record, a long-term view, and the staying power to let Vapiano breath and finds its way back to success. The pressure of being a public company with all the associated quarterly, half-year and yearly disincentives have been removed. The menu is changed and extended with new types of pasta and sauces with significantly more vegetarian and vegan dishes available. Guests can order with restaurant staff, at terminals or on their phones and there are barcodes attached to the tables identify the respective seat. The food is brought to your table, all at the same time if you are in a group, no more annoyances with waiting in line. There is a plan for smaller, 350 square meter locations, with half the number of guests and significantly fewer staff and less set-up costs required to make the economics work. Locations that capitalize on remote work and increased demand for local lunch options, higher population density with shorter delivery routes and therefore cost-effective in house delivery services are targeted. And Bauer is testing the concept of ghost kitchens, which operate without a dining room or service staff, focusing solely on preparing food for delivery services, which for obvious reasons have a very different operational set up and footprint. Original founder Mark Korzilius however is not entirely convinced. He is not a fan of the pinsa for instance and he considers Vapiano's pizza as its cash cow, flagship product and believes that the core Vapiano proposition of Pizza, Pasta, Bar that has given the company its original success is being diluted. He instead admires the competitor L'Osteria, saying they’ve done a better job by focusing on Italian classics, especially the impressively large pizzas that sticks out beyond the plate is leaving every customer in awe. The guys who run L’Osteria are the same guys who have built Vapiano with him in the first place. Bauer on the other hand, like a true business leader, remains undeterred, stating that he is frequently asked whether Vapiano's restart was bold or foolish. He believes in entrepreneurship, franchising, in his experienced fellow partners and importantly the Vapiano concept. By the year 2024 you can find over 140 Vapiano branded restaurant in 27 countries across the globe, including locations far away from its birthplace like Australia, USA, Columbia, Chile, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. And why not? Italian food is, and will remain to be, incredibly popular. Vapiano offers fresh and tasty food at affordable prices in a good atmosphere. This combination of attributes should attract a lot of customers. It certainly has in the past.
For more stories: WIP Thomas Weitzendoerfer Substack

TLDR

• When you cast Caltrops, you swap to your ranged weapon, thus the time taken to cast Caltrops depends on the type of ranged weapon equipped, not the current weapon you're wielding (i.e. bow Caltrops executes faster than crossbow Caltrops).
• Caltrops casts about 13% to 21% faster when it is cast after a Core skill instead of a Basic skill. Best time to cast Caltrops appears to be after Core skills.
• Attack speed makes Caltrops execute faster and waste less time when you could have been throwing out much stronger attacks. Depending on your overall attack speed, you will lose between 2% to 9% DPS due to adding Caltrops to your attack rotation.
• However, this DPS loss is more than compensated by the massive damage bonus granted by Caltrops itself and its supporting effects including Deadly Ambush legendary node and Ambush glyph.
• Consider adding Caltrops to your attack rotation especially for enemies that will be alive for at least 7 seconds.

Intro

Caltrops can provide substantial damage buffs:

• Between 10% and 45% multiplicative damage bonus the longer the enemy stays in Caltrops.
• Either Chill effect or 10% critical strike chance against vulnerable enemies.
• Deadly Ambush legendary node giving 22% multiplicative critical strike damage bonus to trapped enemies.
• Ambush glyph giving 10% multiplicative damage bonus to trapped enemies.

However, some players (including myself) find the backward leap animation annoying:

• Takes a seemingly long time to execute and you can't attack while leaping.
• Puts you at a distance from the enemy, causing you to waste time walking up to the enemy again if your build performs best in melee range.

I wanted to have some quantifiable numbers to understand how much DPS is lost due to the backward leap animation.

How Much Time Does Caltrops Take to Execute?

This is a video to show how the Caltrops animation frame data is collected. I tested using the Basic skills Heartseeker and Puncture, and the Core skills Rapid Fire and Penetrating Shot. All attacks are done at standard 100% attack speed with no bonuses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RX-tMI8_a4A
I start the stopwatch at the start of attack 1, then I cast Caltrops, then I stop the stopwatch at the start of attack 2. In other words, I'm measuring the total time taken of 1 attack plus 1 Caltrops.
Based on my previous animation frame data collection (https://www.reddit.com/D4Rogue/comments/1cmcf2j/analyzing_animation_frames_data_to_answer_my/), I have information about the number of frames taken by Heartseeker, Puncture, Rapid Fire and Penetrating Shot when cast individually. I subtract this number from the above 1 attack + 1 Caltrops to obtain the number of additional frames due to Caltrops.
One interesting observation from the video is Caltrops is cast using your ranged weapon, not your currently wielded weapon. If you were casting dagger Puncture, you will see that you first swap to your ranged weapon before Caltrops is cast. In other words, Caltrops execution time depends on your equipped ranged weapon speed.
Here's an example to help you interpret the table below:

• I cast bow Heartseeker and immediately use Caltrops. The total frames taken is 86.
• I previously measured that each Heartseeker takes 30 frames when cast individually.
• Therefore, Caltrops added 86-30 = 56 additional frames, which is about 1.07 attacks per second.
• Comparing to bow weapon speed of 1.1, Caltrops appears to be 2% slower. I would round this to 0% since it's a small number, so Caltrops is casting at the same speed as the bow's weapon speed.

https://preview.redd.it/bgrqn0n28d0d1.png?width=918&format=png&auto=webp&s=6b7b556e79ccf70c27aa96fc08d229c73225ef3a
Notice that Caltrops somehow casts faster, between 13% and 21%, when the previous attack is a Core skill. Therefore, you will gain a slight speed advantage by casting Caltrops after Core skills instead of Basic skills.

How Much DPS Is Lost Due to Caltrops Backward Leap Animation?

Caltrops has an initial recharge time of 12 seconds without cooldown reduction, or 720 frames at 60 FPS. Let's assume Caltrops takes 55.5 frames to execute on average. This means you are left with 720-55.5 = 664.5 frames to do damaging attacks, compared to the original 720 frames if you didn't have to squeeze in 1 Caltrops cast into your attack rotation. This would be a 664.5/720 - 100% = -8% loss in DPS. Caltrops would need to return to you damage boost of more than this 8% to be worthwhile.
https://preview.redd.it/12aj72ppad0d1.png?width=951&format=png&auto=webp&s=27c7bdfa3f069f0c50e60f9fc6c36fa7f56cbffb
Players can have between 100% and the maximum of 300% attack speed. Attack speed makes Caltrops execute faster, which makes you waste less frames on Caltrops. From the table above, you can see that adding Caltrops to your attack rotation causes you to lose between 2% and 9% DPS depending on your attack speed.
Since Caltrops provides much larger damage boost to negate the DPS loss, it seems to be quite worthwhile to use Caltrops. It's especially useful for tougher enemies that would be alive for at least Caltrops' initial duration of 7 seconds before considering temper affixes.

Limitations

I assumed that attack speed will linearly reduce Caltrops execution time and did not collect animation frame data when attack speed bonus is more than 0%.
I also did not factor in the time it takes for melee Rogues to get back in after leaping backwards, which will result in slightly more DPS loss.

Conclusions

In my opinion, the backward leap animation of Diablo IV's Caltrops is rather annoying compared to Diablo III's instant-cast at-your-feet Caltrops. However, since Caltrops provides a substantial DPS boost by itself and with Deadly Ambush legendary node and Ambush glyph, I would definitely incorporate it in my build and attack rotation especially for pit boss fights.

https://preview.redd.it/p94gmf5jbd0d1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=c46cb17b87dbca0da690eb4fb1e31af33a82523b
Hey everyone, MuscialMagical-1 here. I’ve been noticing a lot of debunks recently, so that must mean that they’re really popular and that I should make one as well. And luckily for me, there’s some idiot named MagicalMusical1 who just so happened to make what I consider the WORST matchup ever, so I’m going to absolutely debunk it now.

I’ve wanted to do this for a while, since my original post on the matchup was when I was just starting out writing connections. It’s still my number one favorite matchup of all time, and I’m not going to stop pushing for it, so let’s run this back again.

Didn’t ask. Moving on.

Note: SINoALICE lore is confusing and there’s just straight up multiple different versions of Snow White. I’m getting all my information from what I believe is the main incarnation of the character (Character Descriptions of the original classes, and the Main Story of SINoALICE Though even in the main story there’s like three different versions of Snow White in the lore but shhhhh) Also, there’s going to be a lot of yapping, so take caution

Why are you debunking yourself not even a minute into your connections list. Are you stupid? Also, I am absolutely prepared to yap back, so you’re the one who should be taking caution

Core Theme: Two similarly named characters who fight for justice by taking down those who are evil after the loss of those close to them. As their journeys progress, both will struggle with being their ideal selves, and be filled with self-doubt. However, there’s a very notable contrast with their paths of justice and how they handle their flaws.

You’re already putting these connections on your connections list anyways, so I don’t have to debunk this part at all

Two major characters in series that are darker takes of their respective genres (Magical Girls/Fairy Tales) with the two taking direct inspiration from those older media (MGRP Snow White’s design is based on classic magical girl outfits/SoA Snow White is literally a stand in for the Snow White in the original fairy tale)

First connection in and there’s already so much wrong here. First of all, Magical Girls and Fairy Tales are not similar in the slightest. Second of all, bro have you seen magical girl and fairy tale shit dude. This weird girl named Minky Mono literally gets hit by a truck and in the original Snow White, The Prince literally orders the Queen to wear a pair of red-hot iron slippers and to dance in them until she drops dead. Those both are so much darker than whatever you’re trying to say here. And lastly (Yes I’m still not done yet), comparing clothing to in your words “literally a stand in for the Snow White in the original fairy tale” What an absolutely comparable connection

They were initially naive, believing in the good in others despite the many times they’ve been proven wrong (MGRP Snow White believed that magical girls were pure, righteous champions of justice, even as the death game was ongoing and after she’d been attacked multiple times by other magical girls/SoA Snow White didn’t recognize the seven dwarves treating her like a slave, and even after her mother tried to kill her, she still wanted to forgive her)

This one isn’t too bad, since at the very least you’re comparing people that tried to kill both, but then you decided to put slavery into this one, really?

However, their breaking point would come after the deaths of those they were close to (La Pucelle and Hardgore Alice/The Prince). Both would blame themselves for these incidents (MGRP Snow White would believe that she was useless as she didn’t take any action that could’ve prevented these incidents/SoA Snow White would blame herself for letting the death of her prince occur, exclaiming that she’ll never forgive what happened)

Okay and now we’re back to the bad stuff. See, MagicalMusical1 uses “those they were close to” to hide how incomparable these people are. The Prince is literally her lover and husband, while La Pucelle and Hardgore Alice are just her friends.

From there, both would swear to use their strong senses of justice to never let these events happen ever again, deciding to go out and defeat those who are evil to make the world a better place (MGRP Snow White taking it upon herself to capture rogue magical girls/SoA Snow White swearing to punish all evil and enforce justice).

Erm, actually one is only fighting a certain type of person while the other is punishing all evil. This isn’t comparable in the slightest

Their personalities shift into stoic fighters who are ruthless to their enemies, yet still kind to those they consider allies.

Generic as fuck.

While we would never directly see these characters administer their justice (It is only stated that MGRP Snow White was able to capture around 30 rogue magical girls/It’s implied that SoA Snow White ruled over her nation as an good enforcer of justice and changed some endings of stories for the better), we will see their paths changing as they go on a journey for another person important to them. (MGRP Snow White goes around trying to look for any clues regarding the whereabouts of Ripple/SoA Snow White goes around killing nightmares in order to revive her authors, The Grimm Brothers)

Firstly, MagicalMusical I know that you don’t actually have the evidence that SoA Snow White ruled her nation as a good enforcer of justice and only are getting that from her TV Tropes page. Secondly, bro why are you doing the “person important to them” shit again. The Grimm Brothers are literally SoA Snow Whites’ creators while Ripple is just MGRP Snow White’s friend.

On these new paths, they try to hold on to their ideals, but over time, their flaws become apparent, and they begin to doubt themselves. (MGRP Snow White continues to get roped up into deadly situations but unable to save everyone like she wants to, causing her to not believe herself to be deserving of her title of Magical Girl HunteSoA Snow White begins to doubt her justice as she continues the immoral path of killing sentient and potentially innocent beings in order to achieve her goal, with the voices of those she killed haunting her)

Ah yes, one is regretting not saving enough people while the other is regretting killing. I can absolutely see the connection there (Breaking character for a moment, holy shit that’s actually another badass contrast this matchup has now that I think about it.)

Extra connections that aren’t really about major story beats/are kinda a stretch thanks to the aforementioned multiple different versions of SoA Snow White in the main story, but still interesting to note the coincidental similarities these two share:

Again, please stop debunking yourself in your own connections list please. And these aren’t even safe either.

Both deal with manipulative mascot-type characters that try to drive both, and other characters like them to kill each other. (Fav, manipulating the events of Unmarked to turn it into a magical girl death exam/Parrah and Noya, who force the cast kill each other, most notably in Act of Elimination)

Parrah and Noya are puppets, please tell me where the “mascot-type” comes from.

While initially put off by these characters at first, both would eventually have a friendship with an Alice in Wonderland inspired character with a darker color scheme and a theme of obsession (Hardgore Alice, who is very focused on being with Snow White and protecting heAlice, who has a theme of bondage and feels heavily attached to her author)

Okay, not only are these characters obsessed with two different people, but one’s named Alice and the other is named Hardgore Alice. Completely incomparable.

Both are noted to be very beautiful (Magical Girls in MGRP are described to be “too beautiful to be human”/SoA Snow White, similarly to the story she’s based on, has incredible beauty that mesmerized everyone in her country)

Bro this connection is so generic that I literally cannot find anything to debunk about it.

Both would eventually be reunited with the person they were looking for, only for an unforeseen event to occur that caused them to lose said important person once again and cause the two to be broken once again (MGRP Snow White would be able to find Ripple, but in her mind control we state, Ripple would kill someone and run away once the mind control wore off, leaving MGRP Snow White to feel helpless and lose hope for a moment/SoA Snow White eventually revives her author in Act of Authors, only for Henrietta Dorothea Wild to be revived instead, and after Snow White killed her, her justice was put into question, leading to herself falling into despair)

Okay, I already said how the important people here aren’t comparable so I'll just say that MGRP Snow White’s friend is killing someone while SoA Snow White is the one doing the killing.

In different points in their stories, both get involved with deadly mobile games with the same name as their series. (The death exam that MGRP Snow White would be involved with would begin due to the Magical Girl Raising Project mobile game/Act of SINoALICE takes place in the real world, with the characters having to deal with nightmares that spawned due to the in-universe SINoALICE mobile game)

The death exam happens in the beginning of MGRP Snow White’s story while Act of SINoALICE happens near the end of SoA Snow White’s story.

Unsure about this one yet as MGRP: Red isn’t translated yet, but from what I’ve heard, both would battle, and lose, to another version of themselves who has less qualms with killing (Homunculus Snow White/Reality Snow White)

I’m skipping this one too as I haven’t read MGRP: Red either. It’s probably wrong tho.

Both have a connection to Batman of all characters (MGRP Snow White has been called the Batman of Magical Girls by the fanbase due to her backstory and the fact that she has a supercomputer assistant mascot/SINoALICE did a collab with DC Comics, with Snow White getting a class where she dressed as Batman) (Yeah this is a huge stretch, but the fact that you can make this stretch at all is the funniest thing ever)
Both are the fan-favorite characters of their respective series, even placing first on official popularity polls.
Oh yeah they have the same name.

Damn all three of these connections are actually solid (especially the Batman one) I have nothing to say here

Contrasts:

What? These aren’t connections. I don’t have anything to say here because the only thing that really matters are connections.
So that’s all for the connections, but the potential is bad as well. There’s literally no reason why MGRP Snow White wouldn’t just ignore SoA Snow White, and I don’t see why SoA Snow White would care about MGRP Snow White since she didn’t really care about Reality Snow White in Act of Elimination.
And the fight potential reeks as well, you’re taking SoA Snow White, a character with swords, bows, polearms, hammers, orbs, instruments, books, staffs, literal nightmares, against someone with only one weapon and then MagicalMusical1 then tries to say that Half-Nightmare Snow White will be used in the fight when that’s never happened in the main story of SINoALICE.

Debate:

I’m skipping this. I literally do now know what MagicalMusical1 is yapping about here.

So in conclusion, aside from debatability this matchup literally appeals to me on all fronts. A combination of good and funny connections, coupled with an amazing contrast. Interesting dynamics in both the fight and interactions. The potential for a very emotional story. And it uses obscure series and characters, one of whom is my favorite fictional character of all time and the other is also a strong contender. Yeah in my opinion this matchup is peak.

Nah bro, in conclusion this matchup sucks. It has bad connections, bad potential, and I forgot to say anything about the story but that probably sucks as well. And you’re using two obscure characters that will never be on Death Battle in the first place, so why even bother? So no, this matchup isn’t peak at all.
Besides, both have better anyways with Snow White vs Madoka Kaname and Snow White vs Kafka Hibano
…What the fuck did I just write?

https://preview.redd.it/14z8a57ead0d1.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=37360a330bf5995f9c4865110107317d4b99ad04
The Interreligious Council of Albania issued a statement last week, outlining its objections to the “Sexual and Reproductive Health Draft Law.”
The Council, chaired by His Beatitude Archbishop Anastasios of Albania, also includes Catholic, Evangelical, and Muslim representatives.
The Council established a working group of jurists, sociologists, theologians, and medical professionals to examine the bill, and its new statement is a result of their work. In particular, the Council objects to the fact that public consultation on the bill was initiated without prior consultation from religious communities and other interested parties.
The Council also objects to particular stipulations in the bill, as explained in its statement, addressed to Parliament, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Health, and the President:
Esteemed Recipients,
Based on its statutory rights, the Interreligious Council of Albania, having been informed by the media about the draft law "On Sexual and Reproductive Health," has established a working group comprised of representatives from five religious communities, consisting of specialists: jurists, sociologists, theologians, and medical professionals, and has worked to review it.
Following the analysis of the work of this group, through this letter, the Interreligious Council raises concern, before the Parliament and the Government, regarding the initiation of public consultation on this draft law without prior consultation with stakeholder groups, including Religious Communities, as well as for the lack of public presentation of the arguments that have led the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs to propose a draft law with negative effects on the health of individuals, children, families, and Albanian society as a whole. The numerous legal, medical, ethical, social, and theological arguments (attached) constitute the basis of our opposition to the draft law in the form it has been presented and call for its reconsideration based on:

1. The prohibition of sterilization as a contraceptive method, except in cases where there is a medical indication, determined by a special medical commission and at the request of the adult.
2. Encouraging childbirth by increasing care and support through more social, economic, educational, healthcare measures, etc.
3. Increasing awareness against voluntary termination of pregnancy, except in cases where there are medical indications and the life of the mother is at risk, as determined by the special medical commission.
4. Complete prohibition of surrogate motherhood in Albania.
5. Protection of the concept of family with mother and father.
6. Not replacing marital bond with the term “woman without a partner”

The Interfaith Council of Albania, as an interested group, requests the suspension of the consideration of the aforementioned draft law without its participation in the consultative sessions at the Ministry of Health; to be granted the right to present findings, recommendations, and objections regarding the draft law; as well as to be part of the public hearings on this draft law. Otherwise, the Interfaith Council requests that the draft law “On Sexual and Reproductive Health” not proceed to the Albanian Parliament. With the desire that our demands, representing the will and views of all our believers as part of the five official religious communities and Albanian society, receive due attention from you and, together, we work for a better and safer future for the younger generations with faith in God and the law for the common good.
May God bless Albania and all its citizens!
Success and prosperity in your work!