Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TerraDave" data-source="post: 6073481" data-attributes="member: 22260">Uhh, no. Not even remotely.Its easy to check these things on the internet. Atkinson, Dancy, and others have been very open. For example:<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wizards_of_the_Coast" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wizards_of_the_Coast</a>By the mid-90s Wizards was making 10s of millions of dollars a year. Yes, they said they "couldn't support" everyway, but that because they wanted to stop loosing money on it.When D&D was purchased in 97, everyone knew about MotG (and far too many people were playing it, got really annoying actually), about WotC and they were by far the dominant force in hobby gaming. They spent years on 3E, put great resources and thought into it, and were massively repaid. Hasbro bought WotC for Pokemon. They offered a lot of money for it, thats why it was sold by WotCs founders. Then, they had cash flow problems, as Hasbro had to justify its investment. The magazines and conventions were spun off with the e-licences, periodic firings became the norm, most WotC founders and many other senior staff would leave, and the gradual decline was on, with the minis and 3.5 giving a temporary reprieve.By 2006, the glory days were over, and WoW panic on. Its true that MtG would make a comeback, allowing a huge amount of money to be wasted on things like Gleemax and the 3D VTT.</blockquote>