Buying D&D

[mmadsen]

I'd bet the novels alone are a lot more than that. The D&D branded computer games probably are too. Assuming Maggan's numbers are even in the same ballpark as reality, I'd speculate that the novel and computer/video game revenues each outpace that of the game itself, meaning that $30 mil for D&D is probably grossly underestimated.

But WotC doesn't capture most of those novel and computer games revenues, does it? How much might it get in licensing deals?

 

[stonehill_troll]

You can help yourself by reading Hasbro Annual Reports for the past few years. This is from memory, so I could be off a bit. They do mention that for WOTC (as others have said above) it was Magic the Gathering and Pokemon that was the true money maker for Hasbro for many years. D&D is not a big item for them. The reports from 2000-2003 go into detail about all the money they lost in WOTC former retail outlets that eventually were all closed.

Over the last two years, the minis have claimed the limelight in the stock report, as sales of Pokemon finally died off. I believe MtG sales are stable. At GENCON Dreamblade was very popular, but we won't know until Feb or March 2007 when they release 2006's annual report if the sales were significant to be noteworthy.

Charles Ryan last year, when he still worked for WOTC posted that their average hardback sold in the hundred of thousands. Be advised that retailers and distributors claim about 55%-60% of the retail price on the book. The printer and publisher get the reminder. IME WOTC collects around $9 on each $30 book, x 100,000 = $900,000. Not bad even if their developments costs are over $250,000 (my estimate) on each book (3-month development cycle I believe they use) and not including other overhead costs. It would not surprise if they weren't getting at least 20% net profit on each book. Though looking at the package sets of MM2, MM3, & FF and the Races set, not all the books have reached that level of sales. Seeing all the adventure modules for 2007, which primarily are aimed at DMs, its obvious they have re-thought they D&D book line for the forseeable future. Yet they have D&D other lines (minis) to carry them thru any dry spell IMO.
From the stock report the minis is making even more money for them, which is why the Star Wars went all mini last year - that's where the real money is. Which also keeps their distributors (who have more control than most of you realize) and retailers happy.

The movie line, (if I remember correctly) ties back to TSR's prior agreements with the studio. WOTC/Hasbro has little or no say in the matter, provided the Studio pays the yearly license fees. Despite the poor reception of the movie among the D&D faithful, the first one actually made money, which is why they made a second. If the second made movie, its likely the Studio will make another one.
I keep seeing talk of a Dragonlance series, but nothing out yet.

WOTC/Hasbro collects license fees from licensing out Dragonlance D20. Also it was collecting license fees from Ravenloft and Gamma World until the license holder finally gave up. I don't think they made as much money as they hoped on those two lines.

Dungeon's & Dragon's Online, not a WoW buster, but its still there and via license agreements with Atari, I am sure WOTC/Hasbro collects their license fees from Turbine's subscriptions.

Novels, art books, posters, etc. are other sources of income on the D&D brand.

 

[Desdichado]

But WotC doesn't capture most of those novel and computer games revenues, does it? How much might it get in licensing deals?

The novels they do. Those are published and distributed by WotC itself.

For the computer games, that's true. But I'd bet that's still a huge chunk of revenue. When you think about the fact that Morrowind, to use just one example, sold over 4 million units, even if only a tiny chunk of that MSRP goes towards the licensing, that's still an awful lot of revenue.

 

[Raloc]

I never saw the first D&D movie (luckily for me), but I thought that the second one was passably decent (though, it was only a mere shadow of any proper D&D campaign).

 

[billd91]

i think this also included other companies too under the umbrella. Avalon Hill for one.

As I recall, Avalon Hill was bought by Hasbro before they bought WotC. It was bought from something called Monarch Avalon Publishing or something along those lines. They sold it off to get out of the gaming biz.
Hasbro bought Avalon Hill something like a year before they bought WotC.

 

[Glyfair]

As I recall, Avalon Hill was bought by Hasbro before they bought WotC. It was bought from something called Monarch Avalon Publishing or something along those lines. They sold it off to get out of the gaming biz.
Hasbro bought Avalon Hill something like a year before they bought WotC.

Hasbro bought Avalon Hill in 1998, WotC in 1999. They ran Avalon Hill separately for a while before they eventually moved it under WotC. Of course, some of the AH games are licensed out (Squad Leader comes to mind).

 

[DaveMage]

The value of the brand itself is an interesting topic.

Personally, I think the value of the name "Dungeons and Dragons" has topped out. Now, I *do* think it could be re-energized, but to do so would require:

a) A Movie or TV show that blows people away with its greatness; or
b) A MMORPG that is more fun to play (and draws a bigger audience) than WoW.

I do not think 4E (should it happen) will improve the value of the brand. (In fact, it may hasten its decline.)

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

If they're interested in selling, I'll give them a buck fifty for the brand.

Wait, make that a buck seventy-five ... I found an extra quarter.

 

[Ranger REG]

Years ago, Wizards of the Coast bought TSR (or just D&D from TSR?),

They bought the whole kit-n-kaboodle, including the once-large RPG designer pool and the periodical department that publishes Dragon and Dung.

If they just bought D&D IP, how'd they manage to publish some Alternity material, including Dark*Matter?

 

[RFisher]

But WotC doesn't capture most of those novel and computer games revenues, does it? How much might it get in licensing deals?

With my experience licensing properties for a software products... The licensor wants to make sure you make just enough off of your product to convince you to make & sell it. They take as much of the pie as they can get. (Which is to be expected.) Since the licensee usually cares about the product they want to make & getting the license more than the licensor cares whether the licensee's product ever sees the light of day, the negotiations are tipped in the licensor's favor. So, if WotC isn't seeing a significant amount of the revenue (if any) from any licensed product, they need to fire whoever is handling those negotiations.

...IME...