Take a look at the new twitch studio and all the money from WotC going to streaming. That money is coming from somewhere.
Yeah, he's the Director of D&D. Interesting that he came out with the statement instead of Mearls. Just something interesting to me I guess.
As I stated above, if this is true, then I'm wondering where all the money is.
They better show outstanding sales for the past fiscal year, and D&D should be MORE than a footnote in this case on the bottom of the report.
I now know where this idea came from and where people are getting it from.
If it is correct and this is active players, then worldwide it is bigger and probably the statement that it is bigger than D&D has ever been is correct. If he is ACCURATE it should ALSO mean great news for all the Hasbro Stock Holders...and the RPG market should be a HECK of a lot larger than 55 million.
I hope it turns out that way. Stock is on the rise over the past 24 hours now (hit a high today right before Noon it appears). [Of course much of that may be due to Fortnight and it's decrease but steady may be due to the news that they were releasing a convention exclusive in Europe before it comes to the US).
There is a difference between it coming from Mearls and coming from Stewart...yes. However, I don't really care to explain why it matters to me.
Why not Stewart instead of Mearls? Would it be more authoritative from Mearls? Does Mearls have access to information his boss does not?
Again, you sound incredulous. Doubtful. Your last two or three posts cite Stewart and imply that the number of players is somehow incredulous.
Which brings me back to what I asked earlier?
Are you implying Nathan Stewart is a liar? That he's purposely telling people inaccurate numbers? Or are you implying that he's incompetent, and doesn't know his job?
Should the D&D market be bigger than $55 million? Once again: IT IS!!!!! The ICv2 reports don't include Amazon.You know, the massive online retailer that is selling hundreds of copies of the PHB each day.
Repeating: the $55 million figure does not include online sales.
Once more for the people in the back: the $55,000,000 figure could be as much as twice as large.
Say it with me now…
Also, keep in mind that while D&D apparently has more players than Magic the Gathering, you NEED a deck to play Magic (and you need to update that deck, and making cards for Magic is super cheap). Plus, you need to update your deck on a regular basis.
Meanwhile, only one person in every 4-6 needs the rulebooks to play D&D. If even as high as that, given there are the Basic Rules are free. AND you only need to pay once, as the book you bought in 2014 or 2015 still works. So that 12 million player number might only translate to 2 1/2 million books sold.
In short, you're looking at the numbers for HALF the sales that are sold to a FIFTH of the audience for a SINGLE year and then complaining that they don't match the total numbers of the audience.
A casual Magic player can easily drop $500 a year just picking up boosters at Target. A hardcore D&D fan will spend a fraction of that amount. More players ≠ more money, in the short term. However, WotC has gotten a lot of other companies to license D&D stuff in the last few years, because...the player base is there to market towards.That COULD BE.
When you get older, you tend to miss a LOT of the stuff that is in Pop Culture.
Now that I've found the source of what people were referring to (did they say anything at GenCon on this? if not, wonder why the local Seattle Paper and not a big event?) I'm willing to wait out and see where it goes in regards to sales and other things. If it is TRUE, then I expect that the RPG market has skyrocketed over the past year.
15 million is serious competing with MtG and probably indicates it has far more players worldwide than MtG. If it is official and that is active players, that actually is HUGE...and the money SHOULD reflect this.
There are a lot of people on D&D Beyond, and D&D Beyond (a third party that pays WotC for the IP) seems to have a lot of money to throw at things.There is a difference between it coming from Mearls and coming from Stewart...yes. However, I don't really care to explain why it matters to me.
Am I incredulous...I am...but now that I know why you guys were claiming what you were claiming, I'm willing to have a wait and see situation on it.
This stuff should be reflected in the Quarterlies, or at a minimum the Annuals. This type of money in flow should mean at least a bump to investors.
If you have 15 million players, and you have over ten books out, you should probably see $5 - $10 per player (many spend zero, but then you have those who make up for it and spend a TON) on average in my approximation. During 3e/3.5 you had around a 5 million player base, and WotC in some thoughts was making between 25 million and 30 million a year. At just $5 on average you'll see $75 million. At $10 you'll see 150 million if that is an ACTIVE player base (emphasis on Active). Everyone needs something like Dice, books, materials, something.
This could also be where some are looking in expanding the brand with coming up with new types of Brand merchandise. I'm not too keen on it, but I think some are pushing for it to go that way. More ways to milk the player base. If it really is 15 million, that should represent a LARGE amount of money.
I'll repost this as I did the edit after you respondedA casual Magic player can easily drop $500 a year just picking up boosters at Target. A hardcore D&D fan will spend a fraction of that amount. More players ≠ more money, in the short term. However, WotC has gotten a lot of other companies to license D&D stuff in the last few years, because...the player base is there to market towards.
You do see that amount of money, being spent on Amazon: that's the thread topic, the ridiculous amount of money being spen at Amazon on D&D. Again, the $55 million doesn't include the Amazon sales.PS: For those who are trying to figure out how this works, let's say at a MINIMUM it costs someone $75 to buy all three core rulebooks. ONLY the DM gets those. For it to be $5 a player that would mean that DM plus the players is equal to 15 total players (DM + 14 others).
$10 is actually a much more reasonable idea (DM + 6 players) and I think it is a 5 player base that is planned for (DM +4 players) which would actually be $15 a group with ONLY ONE individual spending money.
Obviously this is a VERY LOW BALL. I know to some this may seem outrageous amounts of an averaging, but honestly, many don't just buy the core rulebooks, and normally the books, even on amazon are going to be more than $75 all together, and there are going to be many groups that have MORE than 1 PHB in them. I gave a LOW BALL idea of what I SHOULD see therefore. In reality, if the numbers reported are active players and it is higher, I should see a much HIGHER amount.
Though the thing I expect people to toss back at this assumption is that the entirety of the hobby is made up of players playing off the free Basic D&D document. I don't think that's the case, but I expect people will assume that if the numbers do not add up).
Which feels counterintuitive to me.There is a difference between it coming from Mearls and coming from Stewart...yes. However, I don't really care to explain why it matters to me.
You mean stuff like the CEO of Hasbro name dropping D&D repeatedly:This stuff should be reflected in the Quarterlies, or at a minimum the Annuals. This type of money in flow should mean at least a bump to investors.
Look up the Pareto Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principleIf you have 15 million players, and you have over ten books out, you should probably see $5 - $10 per player (many spend zero, but then you have those who make up for it and spend a TON) on average in my approximation. During 3e/3.5 you had around a 5 million player base, and WotC in some thoughts was making between 25 million and 30 million a year. At just $5 on average you'll see $75 million. At $10 you'll see 150 million if that is an ACTIVE player base (emphasis on Active). Everyone needs something like Dice, books, materials, something.
????Again with the trust me but I wont tell you why baloney. What is it about Nathan? Youve already called him a criminal and a lier. I bet if you state exactly why, youd kill your already flagging credibility.
15 million divided by 5 is actually 3 million. 3 million x $75 to buy the core rulebooks is actually $225 million.Which feels counterintuitive to me.
Mearls is the designer. He makes the game. He does the rules. He has no buisness doing the financials or worrying about that other stuff.
You mean stuff like the CEO of Hasbro name dropping D&D repeatedly:
Look up the Pareto Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
Basically, 80% of your sales are going to come from 20% of your audience.
That's really augmented with D&D, as tables are built around one player, typically the DM, who buys all the books. Everyone else buys the dice, which are a negligible purchase. (And a one time purchase not made each year.)
Again, not everyone buys splatbooks or accessories. Most groups don't. D&D ends up being a one time purchase. They buy the core rules and stop.
As you break down, this is a $150-70 purchase. Likely closer to $90-100. With 15 million people, you might have 300,000 DMs and buyers each making $100 purchases for total sales of $3,000,000. Which is waaaaay less than $50 million per year WotC is pulling in.
So D&D players are spending significantly MORE than you'd expect for the hobby, buying the accessories, and multiple players buying PHBs.
Yeah... I got called away halfway through writing and carried on without checking my math. And then has to run to pick up my son, posting too soon...I think your math is a little off.
You probably should look at the links you just dismissed as "name dropping on the internet."In regards to quarterlies and annuals, I'm not referring to name dropping on the internet. These are hard numbers that investors get in reports to their investments. In addition, I think Hasbro regularly makes the annual public and maybe even the quarterlies. These are reports on how Hasbro as a company is doing, and financials and other information.
Is that allowed? I thought this thread was about random tidbits of information posited as facts with just a hint corporate malfeasance.Back to real data.