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.

 

[Bill Zebub]

It didn't explain the thing I was pointing out. See later, I quoted that date because it cut off the boycott from the quarter or the year.

Do NOT call me a conspiracy theorist again.

Your mind control tricks won’t work on me! I’m going to keep believing my conspiracy theory.

 

[darjr]

Your mind control tricks won’t work on me! I’m going to keep believing my conspiracy theory.

Oh all right. Just... I wanna be the cool guy at the white board.

 

[Blue]

I don't. But neither have you provided facts to support your case. Both are opinions based upon personal experience and views.

I am not sure what you are talking about. Both the quote and and the end of fiscal year are in this thread, that's where I learned of them. And the dates of the OGL are well known. All of this has already been presented, most of it in this very thread.

And it's pretty easy to say a year of financial that ends Dec 26, 2022 would not include actions that primarily took place in January 2023. That's not "personal experience and views", that's just how time works for us mere mortals.

 

[Blue]

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?

That's a valid question. Someone does something fairly nasty. They own up to it, apologize, and ask forgiveness.

At this point, it's really important to see if that is a truth, or just a cover for a pattern of action. It's a classic domestic abuse situation.

I don't want someone tarred and feathered. I want them to stop doing nasty things. In this case, much like the first "apology", it's spin something in a way that they look good but is really misleading. Which is still 1000x better than the whole OGL mess.

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.

And here's a perfect example of why that report was spin. Thank you for providing a clarion example of why this is important.

You talk about believing or not believing the report. That is the issue they want you to focus on, since the report is (I assume) completely correct.

However, will a report for the financial year that ENDED on December 26th, 2022, show anything about DnDBeyond cancelations in January 2023? About drops in sales? This really should not be a tough question. It has one, factual answer.

No, January 2023 is not in the financial year Dec 27th, 2021 to Dec 26, 2022. That report has nothing to do with lost sales due to the OGL issue. Yet by associating it with the OGL debacle they ar getting intellignet people to think that it's related. It's not. Time doesn't work like that. So everything they said was truthful. Which doesn't mean it could not be presented in a way that's leads us to draw the wrong conclusion. Exactly as you did when talking about how you believed the report. I believe the report too, but it has no relevance on the impact of the OGL - and major stockholders can sue if they think you are making a lot less then you should be, happened to a company I used to work for. If you want a report on the relevance of the OGL, a year-over-year for January 2023 would be one good place to start, and maybe longer term trends as well. But also like you I think that once they apologized that a lot of people accepted this as done and just wanted to put it behind them.

 

[Parmandur]

That's a valid question. Someone does something fairly nasty. They own up to it, apologize, and ask forgiveness.

At this point, it's really important to see if that is a truth, or just a cover for a pattern of action. It's a classic domestic abuse situation.

I don't want someone tarred and feathered. I want them to stop doing nasty things. In this case, much like the first "apology", it's spin something in a way that they look good but is really misleading. Which is still 1000x better than the whole OGL mess.


And here's a perfect example of why that report was spin. Thank you for providing a clarion example of why this is important.

You talk about believing or not believing the report. That is the issue they want you to focus on, since the report is (I assume) completely correct.

However, will a report for the financial year that ENDED on December 26th, 2022, show anything about DnDBeyond cancelations in January 2023? About drops in sales? This really should not be a tough question. It has one, factual answer.

No, January 2023 is not in the financial year Dec 27th, 2021 to Dec 26, 2022. That report has nothing to do with lost sales due to the OGL issue. Yet by associating it with the OGL debacle they ar getting intellignet people to think that it's related. It's not. Time doesn't work like that. So everything they said was truthful. Which doesn't mean it could not be presented in a way that's leads us to draw the wrong conclusion. Exactly as you did when talking about how you believed the report. I believe the report too, but it has no relevance on the impact of the OGL - and major stockholders can sue if they think you are making a lot less then you should be, happened to a company I used to work for. If you want a report on the relevance of the OGL, a year-over-year for January 2023 would be one good place to start, and maybe longer term trends as well. But also like you I think that once they apologized that a lot of people accepted this as done and just wanted to put it behind them.

It came up because investors asked about it in terms of the coming Quarter, not because they were presenting it as relevant to last Quarter.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Thank you for making my point. Like I said people will remember hence us mentioning it here and they won’t care evidenced by Paizo’s books selling out during the OGL fiasco.

None of that follows but okay

 

[darjr]

Well except in Paizo's case it's more like if WotC had actually fired Mike Mearls. Which makes a huge difference.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That's a valid question. Someone does something fairly nasty. They own up to it, apologize, and ask forgiveness.

At this point, it's really important to see if that is a truth, or just a cover for a pattern of action. It's a classic domestic abuse situation.

I don't want someone tarred and feathered. I want them to stop doing nasty things. In this case, much like the first "apology", it's spin something in a way that they look good but is really misleading. Which is still 1000x better than the whole OGL mess.


And here's a perfect example of why that report was spin. Thank you for providing a clarion example of why this is important.

You talk about believing or not believing the report. That is the issue they want you to focus on, since the report is (I assume) completely correct.

However, will a report for the financial year that ENDED on December 26th, 2022, show anything about DnDBeyond cancelations in January 2023? About drops in sales? This really should not be a tough question. It has one, factual answer.

No, January 2023 is not in the financial year Dec 27th, 2021 to Dec 26, 2022. That report has nothing to do with lost sales due to the OGL issue. Yet by associating it with the OGL debacle they ar getting intellignet people to think that it's related. It's not. Time doesn't work like that. So everything they said was truthful. Which doesn't mean it could not be presented in a way that's leads us to draw the wrong conclusion. Exactly as you did when talking about how you believed the report. I believe the report too, but it has no relevance on the impact of the OGL - and major stockholders can sue if they think you are making a lot less then you should be, happened to a company I used to work for. If you want a report on the relevance of the OGL, a year-over-year for January 2023 would be one good place to start, and maybe longer term trends as well. But also like you I think that once they apologized that a lot of people accepted this as done and just wanted to put it behind them.

Except the truth here, is that you are trying to spin it into soemthing to be mad about when it is not.

They literally just talked about both last years growth and the OGL debacle in the same call, because of course they did, they’re both extremely relevant to projections for the coming quarter and the rest of the year. That’s…it. That’s the story.

The only people associating the two are those reporting on it, and tbh I doubt it’s even intentional.

 

[Myrdin Potter]

Fiscal years don’t generally line up with calendar years. For example, the US government’s fiscal year runs from October to September instead of January to December.

More often than not, calendar year and fiscal year are the same for companies. But they do not have to be. Many retailers end at Jan 31. Hasbro seems to be 4/4/5.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

@Bill Zebub

I think the word is Shill.

Mod Note:

”Shill” is a rather strong accusation to throw around. Let’s not repeat it.