This poll in the dakkadakka site shows that AoS has gotten more than a few wallets moth-ridden.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/666859.page
While "more than a few" is correct, it may give a bit the wrong impression. True, 25% spent more than 250$, but 56% spent nothing at all.
Ok, so this got me curious enough to check it out.
56% spent nothing at all, that means they gave nobody money, so that's a bad sign for AoS in any interpretation, I guess.
The rest spent some, but if you read the replies, a good chunk of them claim they bought what they bought used. Does that count towards the success of AoS? I mean they didn't give GW any of their money.
Some say they spent some money, but then say they only bought paints, tools and so on. What's that got to do with AoS?
I bought un ungor kit and a few other things since AoS came out, but I bought them to use in WFRP 2nd Edition. Does that mean I supported AoS? I would've bought more stuff if AoS hadn't diminished my enthusiasm for the old setting. I voted 0, but some people in the replies voted something else, saying they bought bretonnians or something like that which doesn't necessarily mean AoS.
AoS positions itself to take the place of WFHB, taking the merit for some of the latter's sales, which is why I think that poll shows a prettier picture than what's real.
Also, I tried looking at the google search graph linked below for warhammer fantasy vs age of sigmar. I'm not exactly sure how to use it, but if I did it right, search interest is actually lower right now for AoS (although by a very small margin) than it is for WFHB (which is reasonable to assume it would be lower due to the AoS hit).
https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=warhammer%20fantasy%2C%20age%20of%20sigmar&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT-2