Decline of RPG sales

[FATDRAGONGAMES]

This doesn't apply to all distributors but what happens sometimes is that a big, hot collectible product releases so the money goes to buying more from the publisher of the newest CCG, CMG, whatever is hottest, instead of paying the smaller publishers. It's actually a form of speculation in a much larger scale than single gamers take part in. (Think of it as: "If I take the $1,000 I owe this publisher and buy more of X then I'll be able to pay the original publisher his $1,000 in a few weeks and have more profits from X then if I hadn't done this.")

It's not just the RPG distributers that do this. I have worked in the hobby industry (i.e. model kits) for a long time now and those distributers do the same thing. That's the great part of PDF publishing, all of that B.S. goes away for the most part.

 

[BryonD]

This doesn't apply to all distributors but what happens sometimes is that a big, hot collectible product releases so the money goes to buying more from the publisher of the newest CCG, CMG, whatever is hottest, instead of paying the smaller publishers. It's actually a form of speculation in a much larger scale than single gamers take part in. (Think of it as: "If I take the $1,000 I owe this publisher and buy more of X then I'll be able to pay the original publisher his $1,000 in a few weeks and have more profits from X then if I hadn't done this.")

gotcha, thanks

So it sounds like this may be one piece of what is causing problems for some small guys, rather than the problems causing this. Which is what I was really wondering: Is this a cause or an effect?

Sounds like it would be nice to get a better contract with the distributor. But I understand how much easier said than done THAT is.....

 

[SteveC]

This doesn't apply to all distributors but what happens sometimes is that a big, hot collectible product releases so the money goes to buying more from the publisher of the newest CCG, CMG, whatever is hottest, instead of paying the smaller publishers. It's actually a form of speculation in a much larger scale than single gamers take part in. (Think of it as: "If I take the $1,000 I owe this publisher and buy more of X then I'll be able to pay the original publisher his $1,000 in a few weeks and have more profits from X then if I hadn't done this.")

That is very interesting. That brings up a good question: what kind of contact does a publisher have with the distributor in these cases? I would think that there would be some language about being paid out in X days, but am I so far off the mark as to be laughable here?

 

[buzz]

Unrelated, sorry

...

FDG, would you mind reducing or eliminating the big graphics from your .sig? They're blowing the width of the thread page. Thanks!

 

[Pramas]

Well, I obviously agree, because that was my interpretation of the numbers that we have up in post #327. I used the example of Green Ronin for a company that struggles because of their difficulties to get seen in book chains or on amazon. And Patrick Lawinger said basically the same before me.

Gee, I was trying real hard not to get involved in this thread, but now I must clarify. Green Ronin did not have a challenging 2005 because of theoretical lost sales in the book trade. Green Ronin had a challenging 2005 because our key business partner didn't pay us for months worth of actual sales through all channels. A side effect of our break with them was that we didn't have book trade disbtibution for a few months but we took care of that with a deal with Diamond Book Distribution. About a third of our Mutants & Masterminds Second Edition sales have been in the book trade, for example. At this point issues with Amazon are entirely the doings of Amazon, though we are working with them and Diamond to get everything ironed out.

Regarding this thread in general:
* Remember that most companies are privately held and don't share their sales numbers. This makes it hard to get an accurate picture.
* Remember that some companies do indeed use PR spin to fluff themselves up.
* Remember that every time a topic like this comes up, it devolves into an ultimately pointless argument because of the previous two points.

 

[PatrickLawinger]

Gee, I was trying real hard not to get involved in this thread, but now I must clarify.

<big Snip>

* Remember that most companies are privately held and don't share their sales numbers. This makes it hard to get an accurate picture.
* Remember that some companies do indeed use PR spin to fluff themselves up.
* Remember that every time a topic like this comes up, it devolves into an ultimately pointless argument because of the previous two points.

Add to #3 the fact that when a publisher or someone involved in publishing does post, their posts can get "interpreted" through several rounds so that you don't even recognize what people say you posted ...

 

[Turjan]

Add to #3 the fact that when a publisher or someone involved in publishing does post, their posts can get "interpreted" through several rounds so that you don't even recognize what people say you posted ...

Sorry, I didn't want to imply that you said anything about Green Ronin. Upon reading my post again, I see that it could be interpreted this way, but this was not what my meant. I'll edit that post.

 

[Turjan]

Gee, I was trying real hard not to get involved in this thread, but now I must clarify. Green Ronin did not have a challenging 2005 because of theoretical lost sales in the book trade. Green Ronin had a challenging 2005 because our key business partner didn't pay us for months worth of actual sales through all channels. A side effect of our break with them was that we didn't have book trade disbtibution for a few months but we took care of that with a deal with Diamond Book Distribution. About a third of our Mutants & Masterminds Second Edition sales have been in the book trade, for example. At this point issues with Amazon are entirely the doings of Amazon, though we are working with them and Diamond to get everything ironed out.

Okay, not being paid for your sales is obviously the most important point. Nevertheless, not being able to sell anything through the book trade for several months when, afterwards, the book trade sales make up one third of the total doesn't exactly sound like nothing worth talking about. And the point that "issues with Amazon are entirely the doings of Amazon" doesn't help much with the problem, either. Once the damage is done, it's always hard to do something about it. But it's good to hear that everything seems to get on the right track again .

 

[Warbringer]

It's interesting to note that the the statements "WotC has had its best year ever for D+D" and "RPG sales are declining" are not mutually exclusive.

Note two items:
1st, D+D sales metrics at WoTC include the DDM line. This is a great revenue stream, with solid profitability.

2nd: The overall msrp of WoTC products has increased significantly in the last 2 years (I believe from an average msrp $20 to $30)

Combined, revenues and profits can be up, while the number of actual gamers is in decline.

Re the 4.6million D+D players. I believe that that is has played the game at least once in the last 12 months, plus now includes mini game (one wonders about crossover). This number is not materially different from the 4million players that has been quoted for the last 10+ years.

Of note, WoW online has really been drawing alot of gamers from traditional avenues: rpg, table top, and other crpg.

2c

 

[buzz]

Combined, revenues and profits can be up, while the number of actual gamers is in decline.

It should be pointed out that the original topic of this thead was a decline in sales. There's no evidence (that I've been privy to) saying that there's been a recent decline in the number of people who play RPGs. These are separate issues, and the thread is ostensibly discussing the former.

If we are to believe the words of Charles Ryan (indeed, a risky proposition given attitudes in this thread), the number of people regularly gaming has been icnreasing.

Re the 4.6million D+D players. I believe that that is has played the game at least once in the last 12 months, plus now includes mini game (one wonders about crossover). This number is not materially different from the 4million players that has been quoted for the last 10+ years.

Ryan's numbers do not include D&D minis, and counts the number of people playing at least on a monthly basis. It is up from the numbers WotC quoted the year before, the year before that, and significantly up from the WotC market survey in '99 which put the tabletop RPG popuation at 2.25 million. Whether this is an actual increase or different methodology, I dunno.