Unconfirmed: More Layoffs at WotC

[Jasperak]

They gave the magazine licenses to Paizo, and that worked out well for them. With the launch of 4E, they wanted to bring those in house and online - and that, too, has worked out well for them.

Did it work out well for them? Since WOTC gave the licenses to Paizo they lost $10-15 per month from me. Paizo gained that money and built up their brand and grew what I would presume to be a profitable business. Just on the magazines that WOTC didn't want in-house anymore. WOTC didn't re-earn my business when they brought the magazines back in-house.

I wonder on the grand scale if WOTC makes more profit on Dragon and Dungeon now than Paizo did when they were the stewards. I guess if there were people that signed up for their online subscription service only for their RPG articles and not edition specific applications (Character/Monster Builder), then you could say that Dragon and Dungeon are successes for them.

/tangent

 

[redboxrazor]

In reply to Mark Hobo wrote:

Term "lying" might be to strong to use here, however "avoiding factual statements" appears to be appropriate.
It's a common practice and form of brand protection, since being viewed as unsuccessful could damage sales.

Hence use of "tinfoil hat" is not appropriate here.

Regards,
Ruemere

A lie of ommision is still a lie. This very idea is a principled topic in ethics courses.

 

[Fifth Element]

This popcorn is awesome!

As awesome as bullywugs? Doubtful.

 

[Alzrius]

Is it buttered?

Real butter?

Of course it's real; Jack99's got milk, remember.

 

[Eridanis]

Despite warnings, this thread has degenerated beyond saving. Thread closed.