Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5372447" data-attributes="member: 51942">Supermarkets aren't platforms.&nbsp; They sell commodoties and if the shop next door has prices that are a few percent lower - they go out of business.&nbsp; By contrast, notice that windows is very much in business despite free alternatives.&nbsp;Yep, and that's entirely their fault.&nbsp; This has little to do with openness or closedness (I could export my gmail account any day, yet choose not to), and everything to do with supporting the platform.&nbsp; WotC seems to be lobbing books like grenades over some wall and then running away: fire and forget.&nbsp; Yet the compendium and the CB and so many more potential network effects would make it trivially easy for them to charge merely for being the hub and the watchman over that marketplace.Because it's easy to use, not too expensive, and provides a useful service - oh, and because the barrier to entry for compentitors is high enough.&nbsp; Guess what?&nbsp; WotC brand and central position make the barrier to competitors very high, and apparently D&amp;DI is not too expensive, and it could provide a bunch of useful services - services like the CB and compendium - which don't depend on the exact source of the data but merely on the fact that everyone wants in on their D&amp;D market and fans will even (gladly) make content for free.&nbsp;Sure, I'm saying they should quite messing about with ever more trivial character options, and focus on the service - so, for instance, you could make that &quot;look at me!&quot; article partially subscriber only.&nbsp; Or make the stats within it subscriber only.&nbsp; Of course they want the subscription, but they can make the subscription attractive - more attractive even - by doing less themselves and letting others in on it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5372447, member: 51942"] Supermarkets aren't platforms. They sell commodoties and if the shop next door has prices that are a few percent lower - they go out of business. By contrast, notice that windows is very much in business despite free alternatives. Yep, and that's entirely their fault. This has little to do with openness or closedness (I could export my gmail account any day, yet choose not to), and everything to do with supporting the platform. WotC seems to be lobbing books like grenades over some wall and then running away: fire and forget. Yet the compendium and the CB and so many more potential network effects would make it trivially easy for them to charge merely for being the hub and the watchman over that marketplace. Because it's easy to use, not too expensive, and provides a useful service - oh, and because the barrier to entry for compentitors is high enough. Guess what? WotC brand and central position make the barrier to competitors very high, and apparently D&DI is not too expensive, and it [I]could[/I] provide a bunch of useful services - services like the CB and compendium - which don't depend on the exact source of the data but merely on the fact that everyone wants in on their D&D market and fans will even (gladly) make content for free. Sure, I'm saying they should quite messing about with ever more trivial character options, and focus on the service - so, for instance, you could make that "look at me!" article partially subscriber only. Or make the stats within it subscriber only. Of course they want the subscription, but they can make the subscription attractive - [I]more attractive even[/I] - by doing [I]less[/I] themselves and letting others in on it. [/QUOTE]

Verification