NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Corjay" data-source="post: 4433187" data-attributes="member: 52839">I'm a firm believer in loss leading sales. What's happening here is that words are being shoved into my mouth. I never said nor implied what you are attributing to me.You're comparing apples and oranges. Yes, they are both fruits, but they're not the same. What you're pointing out is the theory behind it. Like I said, this conversation has been trampling that ground over and over from thread to thread. What I want is proof of how the OGL has succeeded in that area for WOTC. Otherwise what we have is a bunch of people with opinions, myself included, and no real facts. So your yes has no more weight or value than my no until you can prove that WOTC financially benefited from the OGL. This whole discussion got to this point because of my claim that the OGL did not make money for WOTC. You all insist I'm wrong simply because the theory is successful in other mostly unrelated areas. What the OGL was meant to be and what it ended up being in practice are also two different things.No, I didn't change the question. If you have been reading my posts, the question has remained the same. Yes, I am looking for validation that it has affected WOTC's bottom line. You make it look like it's a crime to ask such a thing. I'm not questioning the theory of royalty-free loss leader products. I am only questioning whether the OGL ever achieved that goal to WOTC's benefit. Yes, it cost WOTC money. Yes, it spread the product around. But my claim is that no, it did not do anything significant for WOTC.Unless someone has a legitimate and direct response to my query, then don't bother responding. This whole discussion is just running in circles on matters that have nothing to do with what I'm asking about. I know the theory. I believe in the theory. You're preaching to the converted. I'm not, nor have I ever been attacking the theory. I'm attacking the effectiveness of the OGL and the OGL only. If you can't establish that WOTC benefited from the OGL, then you can't discount my claim that WOTC's motives for the GSL are based on the OGL's failure. If you don't want to go in that direction, then why bother with the discussion?Otherwise, get back to the point of the thread, which is to discuss WOTC's motives for the GSL.</blockquote>

Verification