The ENnies mandate isn't to generate sales - although if they do have that side benefit, then I'm sure nobody will complain.
The ENnies are to award recognition to those who work in the industry. It's a way for the fans and peers to step up and say "Well done! You did a fine job there!" To some people, I'm sure that doesn't matter, but to others it has a value in of itself.
Thats all well and good, but the OTHER way the ENnies are looked at, especially by smaller publishers where shipping off those 6 copies, often with shipping over seas and to Canada, is a hit to their finances. So they ask themselves, "Does the expense of the ENnies help my bottom line? What tangible benefit does it give my company?"
I heard about a half dozen companies seriously question the value, to the point where even PAST WINNERS are questioning how much they will support the ENnies in the future, including what they will submit, and if they submit.
So yes, the issue of the financial value of being nominated, let alone winning the ENnies, is financially worth it to the various publishers, in particular the small ones, needs to be addressed and clarified for these publishers.
During the ENnies the MC, and maybe even Peter A., commented on the diversity submitted to the ENnies. So any value added that can be determined to be a benefit to these publishers, especially the small ones, will help the ENnies to continue to comment on how the submissions continue to grow.
Helping their bottom line, especially when they are also a past winner, is an important thing to prove, since they cited how they do not see any help to their sales being derived from their ENnies wins. To the point where they commented their future submissions will be curtailed.
Is that a direction the ENnies wishes to go? Including with past winners?
I don't think so.