WotC Replies: Statements by WotC employees regarding Dragon/Dungeon going online

[CharlesRyan]

Both magazines were doing better then they have ever done. This is not just speculation, it's fact.

No, it's speculation.

 

[CharlesRyan]

This is from Rich Baker, Senior Designer, Roleplaying R&D, Wizards of the Coast, Inc. . . .

I'll back up fellow Hokie Rich on this one. Anyone who thinks that D&D benefits from a shrinking RPG market is nuts--and when I was last in the WotC building, nobody was that crazy. The health of the RPG hobby and marketplace is a tide that floats all boats, even the D&D supertanker.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Both magazines were doing better then they have ever done. This is not just speculation, it's fact.

No, it's speculation.

Actually, no and no.

By their own numbers (that have been numerously posted by others- with attribution) at its peak, Dragon's circulation was about 3x what it is right now. However, current circulation is on an increasing trend, and is the best its been in many years.

(Just FYI: In post #128 of this thread, E. Gary Gygax points out that at one point, Dragon was grossing $1M/year profit.)

 

[Hussar]

*snip for excellent points*

The problem with all of that is the assumptions that the profits that Dragon and Dungeon make are enough to keep them going if WOTC does it. If they were, then I would guess that they would have kept the magazines going. However, I'm willing to think that they are looking at the bottom line and saying that it just isn't worth it.

Somewhere around here was also mentioned a fairly large price hike for magazines by the postal service. That would take a big bite out of the profits right there.

As far as people who live in countries where their internet is regularly censored, well, since Paizo only published in English, I highly doubt they had much penetration there. Possible, but, extremely unlikely. OTOH, it is quite possible for WOTC to have the DI offered in different languages. After all, I see the PHB, DMG and numerous other books in Japanese when I head down to the hobby shops here. It would never be profitable enough to print Dragon in Japanese, but, translating a website? Not such an insurmountable task.

The problem is, everyone points to Paizo and says they were making money. I'm sure that's true. But, were they making enough money? I don't know. I have no idea. A sneaking suspicion, based on the 100k magazines/month in their stats says no, they weren't making a lot of money. Maybe a lot for a 3rd party publisher, but, possibly not enough for a publisher the size of WOTC. Remember also, the DI doesn't have to make more money than Dungeon and Dragon, only more money than the license brought in to make it a success.

Yes, the magazine is in a non-volatile format, but, the distribution is so small that virtually no one actually sees it. Yes, websites get hacked. Then again, post trucks get into car accidents and burn (which happened a few months back) No medium is fool proof.

If WOTC publishes the magazine itself, it's simply competing with itself. That's never good for business. If it was going in the model of a newspaper website, and mostly paid for by advertising space on the website, then possibly. But, they are going with a subscription model. Meaning that people who get the magazine instead of the web access are a net loss.

I'm fairly confident that this conversation was held at WOTC long before we've had it. They looked at the pros and cons of dropping the magazine and decided that dropping it made more sense. I would love to hear their thinking on this as I'm sure most people would.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Yes, the magazine is in a non-volatile format, but, the distribution is so small that virtually no one actually sees it.

Not according to vets like Monte Cook. Someone else mentioned that a 1% readership rate is a good rate. They're also pretty much the only trade magazines D&D has got.

So I'm not buying the argument that they weren't serving a very useful marketing role for D&D.

 

[Ourph]

Step forward a bit and imagine that WOTC is putting full page spreads in Dragon and Dungeon asking customers to effectively abandon the magazines for the DI. The howling would be immediete and long lasting.

I'll just repeat...

I'm not going to argue no one would be upset by that scenario, but, yes, I suspect there would be alot less harsh feelings

 

[Storm Raven]

Remember also, the DI doesn't have to make more money than Dungeon and Dragon, only more money than the license brought in to make it a success.

The problem with looking at things this way is that it assumes that the only value Dragon and Dungeon had was the dollars they brought in. I would contend that they had other, much more valuable aspects.

They provided an avenue for bringing new players to the game. They provided an avenue for new game designers and writers to cut their teeth in publishing. They provided a format for advertising D&D (and other RPG related) products to hardcore gamers. They provided support for players newer to the hobby to run their own games, and improve the network of available games. And so on.

Frankly, I'm surprised that these magazines were able to be spun off to begin with, because that means that they were actually making money in addition to basically being a marketing tool for WotC and D&D. Before Paizo licensed the right to publish the magazines, I pretty much assumed that they were loss leaders intended to provide marketing support. The fact that they were profitable is, in my mind, a bonus.

Will the DI serve these other functions? I don't know for certain, but I doubt it.

 

[Razz]

Heck, don't some of the people at Paizo do work for WoTC? (Looks at certain Expedition book with title of authors.)

Fiendish Codex I is another one.

 

[Jim Hague]

The problem with looking at things this way is that it assumes that the only value Dragon and Dungeon had was the dollars they brought in. I would contend that they had other, much more valuable aspects.

Sadly, not to a business. And I reiterate here - Paizo was doing such a bang-up job with them both that it was growing Paizo's business and not WotC's. And when it comes to the bottom line, if the license wasn't growing WotC's stuff, then it'd be better done in house.

They provided an avenue for bringing new players to the game. They provided an avenue for new game designers and writers to cut their teeth in publishing. They provided a format for advertising D&D (and other RPG related) products to hardcore gamers. They provided support for players newer to the hobby to run their own games, and improve the network of available games. And so on.

See, here I really disagree. Only the hardcore gamers ever really picked up Dragon and even fewer (mostly GMs) picked up Dungeon. I rarely saw, at least in the past 3-4 years, new writers being brought into the fold or published, and the waiting list was long enough that Paizo didn't need to solicit content. I'll agree somewhat on the support idea, but consider that to really, really be more advanced than new players are going to look at or need. And I'll say that neither magazine really brought new people in - again, it's who the magazines were marketed to.

Frankly, I'm surprised that these magazines were able to be spun off to begin with, because that means that they were actually making money in addition to basically being a marketing tool for WotC and D&D. Before Paizo licensed the right to publish the magazines, I pretty much assumed that they were loss leaders intended to provide marketing support. The fact that they were profitable is, in my mind, a bonus.

Will the DI serve these other functions? I don't know for certain, but I doubt it.

The DI will, I'd guess, serve different functions - by targeting the valuable 18-35, internet-savvy market. As for the magazines being profitable...well, again, they were profitable for Paizo, not so much for WotC.

I'm still unhappy that they're going away, though it's a golden opportunity for Paizo to really stretch their wings as a publisher. The DI? Well...we'll see. I'm pretty leery of it at this time, but hope that I'll be proven wrong.

 

[Storm Raven]

Sadly, not to a business. And I reiterate here - Paizo was doing such a bang-up job with them both that it was growing Paizo's business and not WotC's. And when it comes to the bottom line, if the license wasn't growing WotC's stuff, then it'd be better done in house.

Actually, all of the things I mentioned would be growing WotCs business. The only element that grows Paizo's business is directly making money with the magazine.

See, here I really disagree. Only the hardcore gamers ever really picked up Dragon and even fewer (mostly GMs) picked up Dungeon. I rarely saw, at least in the past 3-4 years, new writers being brought into the fold or published, and the waiting list was long enough that Paizo didn't need to solicit content. I'll agree somewhat on the support idea, but consider that to really, really be more advanced than new players are going to look at or need. And I'll say that neither magazine really brought new people in - again, it's who the magazines were marketed to.

And who does WotC think they are marketing their various supplemental products to other than hardcore gamers? And the new gamers aren't brought in by buying the magazine - how many people have said "I started playing D&D because a friend [lent me, let me read, showed me] a copy of Dragon"? This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it one that seems to have disappeared, this seems to be a method of entry that has taken place from the 1970s through now. How many gamers have started or continued campaigns because of material from the magazines? (And having a network of existing gamers actively playing in ongoing games is critical for the continued health of D&D; ask someone who plays - or rather for many of them, used to play - a defunct RPG or CCG).

WotC gives up all of those benefits of Dungeon and Dragon, and I just don't see the DI as likely to be a very good replacement on that score. As I've said before, I think this decision will turn out to have been penny wise, but pound foolish.