WotC Hasbro's CEO Reports OGL-Related D&D Beyond Cancellations Had Minimal Impact

Hasbro held a quarterly earnings call recently in which CEO Chris Cocks (who formerly ran WotC before being promoted) indicated that the OGL controversy had a "comparatively minor" impact on D&D's revenue due to D&D Beyond subscription cancellations. He also noted that D&D grew by 20% in 2022 (Magic: the Gathering revenues grew by an astonishing 40% in Quarter 4!)

WotC as a whole was up 22% in Q4 2022.

Lastly, on D&D, we misfired on updating our Open Gaming License, a key vehicle for creators to share or commercialize their D&D inspired content. Our best practice is to work collaboratively with our community, gather feedback, and build experiences that inspire players and creators alike - it's how we make our games among the best in the industry. We have since course corrected and are delivering a strong outcome for the community and game.

 

[Blue]

No. Just because many members of the public do not understand corporate financials and how quarterly earnings calls are done does not mean WotC or Hasbro has done anything misleading.

That is a true statement that has nothing to do with the case at hand. As a matter of fact, it's a great example of exactly the kind of "using a true statement to imply something false" that WotC did.

What they said about grown is true (I assume). However their financial year ended Dec 26th, 2022, so their their 2022 numbers would not reflect the OGL controversy, or would reflect it for a very small percentage of the total days. Presenting that with news of their OGL "misfire" implying that there was no real financial consequence of the OGL issue is misleading.

It's like walking into a lawyers' convention and then complaining you don't know what they are talking about because you have no knowledge of legal jargon. Or a thousand other possible examples of sub-cultures and specific jargon (like gamer speak, or geek talk, or...)

Again, this is true but is more being used to discredit than to actually prove anything. The dates are known facts, so the conclusion that the growth number could not reflect the real (and potentially still ongoing) impact of the OGL controversy is also true.

If you have supported specifics about why it is not true I'd be glad to hear them, but not just hand waved away by "oh, people don't understand that so their conclusion can not be true".

 

[Blue]

This isn't to the public, it's to shareholders. Meaning that putting out misleading statements can land you in serious legal trouble. There is arguably some minor spin here, but the statements have to be factual.

The statement is true (I assume). Presenting is as proof that the OGL debacle had no real financial impact when it only included up until the end of their fiscal year (Dec 26, 2022) while most of the OGL issues were after that however is misleading.

 

[darjr]

But the principle holds true: anyone with whom one does business is a customer. Publicly traded companies have significant external customers on both ends, but in the end having to answer to a handful of private owner or a large number of public owners is still dealing with customers for everyone in the company.

What’s the addage about figuring out your true motives by looking at what you do when nobody knows? Nobody knew about the OGL fiasco until it was leaked.

I’m super glad Kyle and others were able to fix it, I’m sure Chris was too. I hope the shareholders understand. Maybe they dint need too though.

 

[Parmandur]

What’s the addage about figuring out your true motives by looking at what you do when nobody knows? Nobody knew about the OGL fiasco until it was leaked.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the business theory of everyone being a customer...? That is the philosophy that won out when the OGL changes were dropped, at least.

I think the only thing we can deduce about the motives about anyone at WotC based on the kerfuffle is that, first, they want money, but second, they disagreed internally on how to do that. And someone eventually sold their customer (the executives) on Creative Commons.

 

[Oofta]

It happened right at the end of 2022, even after holiday purchases - it wouldn't have affected sales any of that year. “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” In this case, they put up a statistic that literally has nothing to do with the event as proof to their stockholders their "misfire" wouldn't affect them.

Let's look at 1Q2023 year-over-year to actually judge that.

Well, looks like WotC is continuing putting out misleading statements to the public. Multiple times start to outline a recurring pattern. While I'm not sympathizing with the stockholders, WotC still haven't identified who sent that original "apology" that also contained information that later was shown to be false to have them apologize for lying to us. Wonder if it's someone to high up to be willing to take a fall so they just hope we forget about it with Kyle Brink's effective media blitz. He at least seems to get it.

Why does someone have to take the blame? There's obviously spin going on, but in terms of corporate malfeasance it barely registers.

What do you want? Somebody tarred and feathered? Destroy someone's career because they screwed up? Why would it matter?

I guess I just don't get it. I don't blame people I know for what they considered doing, even if they changed their minds because I told them it was unacceptable. I accept that people aren't perfect and even if they aren't 100% honest it's what they actually do that matters. People, and companies, make mistakes.

As far as the report, I can believe the cancelations didn't have much impact because many people likely renewed after the change of direction. That, and just because the internet echo chamber made it sound like a huge issue, we simply don't know how many people canceled.

 

[Oofta]

SHOCKING REVELATION ... CORPORATIONS PRIMARILY CARE ABOUT MAKING PROFIT ... REPORT AT 11 ... REPEAT: SHOCKING REVELATION ...

 

[Scribe]

SHOCKING REVELATION ... CORPORATIONS PRIMARILY CARE ABOUT MAKING PROFIT ... REPORT AT 11 ... REPEAT: SHOCKING REVELATION ...

Seemingly yes, the typical "they must make profit" argument when they have a revenue of what, 6 billion?

Now where's my violin...

 

[Umbran]

“Quarter ended Dec 26, 2022”?

Not only that - but for large corporations it takes time to gather all the information and finalize finances.

If the quarter ended December 26th, you can be pretty sure they didn't have the final accounting on Jan 1, 2023 yet.

 

[Umbran]

Seemingly yes, the typical "they must make profit" argument when they have a revenue of what, 6 billion?

Now where's my violin...

With that kind of logic, you get "Yay, I made $100K this year! I can buy a yacht now!"

Revenue itself tells you little.

 

[Scribe]

With that kind of logic, you get "Yay, I made $100K this year! I can buy a yacht now!"

Revenue itself tells you little.

Oh yes, quite comparable.