D&D General Hasbro activist begins proxy fight, urges Dungeons & Dragons spinoff

If WotC was spinned off, would Hasbro keep or lose the controll? It doesn't sound like a good idea. It would be as saying Warner should be sell DC, and Disney Marvel+Star Wars, and both spin-off to be adquired by Hasbro. Wouldn't be ridiculous? Maybe WotC could need more independence, but within the company.

And a part of me suspects this may be not only about money, but other reasons could be possible, because all the franchises from the entertaiment industry can be used to cause intentionally a cultural influence over others.

Other reason to say no to the spin off is Hasbro doesn't want to put all the eggs in only one basket. They have been selling toys, but someday the bad years will arrive. They need other options, and these are the media, the videogames, and the tabletop games for teenages and young adults. The plans for WotC aren't only to publish Magic and D&D but to focuse into the digital market. If Hasbro plays rightly its cards, they could become a new Disney empire.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Interesting, they very much are not just that, I see, looking them up. The shows they're doing make me slightly more hopefully about potential D&D TV shows, at least in terms of the minimum quality level they're likely to accept.
I have my expectations set firmly to "might occasionally produce something interesting," but the potential for some decent programming is real.
 


The plans for WotC aren't only to publish Magic and D&D but to focuse into the digital market. If Hasbro plays rightly its cards, they could become a new Disney empire.
Not a chance. Disney is literally an empire, while Hasbro is just a successful company.

Splitting off WotC could benefit the stockholders, which is a reason to run the numbers on it.
 


Hasbro buying Games Workshop? Possible, but we don't know if it may be probable. Not yet.

Do you really think Hasbro failed promoting their own brands? My opinion is Alta Fox is wrong, and Hasbro should continue developing their own IPs. I wouldn't be too surprise if Hasbro adquires more brands, even some little 3PPs with economic problems, but with some good ideas.

WotC within Hasbro is stronger to negotiate partnership deals with other megacorporations about possible adaptations, for example intercompany crossovers with Magic: the Gathering, or adaptations of famous videogames. WotC made a lot of money with Star Wars RPG. I guess more than Fantasy Flight Games with that new system. (I could buy as gift for my niece Star Wars d20, even if she doesn't understand the rules of the game system, but the last game by FFG... I don't feel confortable, I don't get used).

Why after to plant fruit trees and await are you going to sell them when they have started to produce fruits?

Sorry, maybe my level of English languange is not enough good but... doesn't this sound like actions of "corporate raiders" or "baron robbers"? What if the goal of this isn't the independence of WotC, at all, but a change to be controlled by new owners?

2022 will be a year with a lot of troubles in the entertaiment industry. I have speculated about possible mergers and adquisitions, but I couldn't imagine a possible demerger.

It's not that Hasbro didn't promote their Brands at WotC, it's that it had a parasitic relationship with WotC, where they drew profits out, but didn't reinvest properly, so the brands as well they are doing, aren't doing as well and they should be. For example Arena not having multi-player when Commander is by far the most popular format is a serious missed opportunity, and not having a novel line anymore, when Games Workshop proves it cam be done profitably, etc..., are missed opportunities. Instead they made bad investments like Dark Alliance, one of the few investments they made, instead of actually investing in profitable endevours.
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
It's not that Hasbro didn't promote their Brands at WotC, it's that it had a parasitic relationship with WotC, where they drew profits out, but didn't reinvest properly, so the brands as well they are doing, aren't doing as well and they should be. For example Arena not having multi-player when Commander is by far the most popular format is a serious missed opportunity, and not having a novel line anymore, when Games Workshop proves it cam be done profitably, etc..., are missed opportunities. Instead they made bad investments like Dark Alliance, one of the few investments they made, instead of actually investing in profitable endevours.
Do you have reason to believe that Dark Alliance is less profitable than pulp novels in the 20's...?
 



MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Hasbro doesn't relinquish something once they get it. I would be greatly surprised if they cut out WotC, especially since it wouldn't surprise me if WotC was quite a huge chunk of their income. I wouldn't be against it, but I don't see it happening.
This is the reason shareholders want it spun off. Shareholders see WotC getting record sales with very little investment, but that income isn't becoming money in their pockets, because it is being used to support the rest of Hasbro. They don't see it reflected in share prices, not in dividends. But if they spin off WotC, the company on its own would see that record income become record profit, which can be reinvested in WotC itself-to raise share price- or taken as dividends -money given to shareholders-.
 

Not a chance. Disney is literally an empire, while Hasbro is just a successful company.

Splitting off WotC could benefit the stockholders, which is a reason to run the numbers on it.
Rebember before the Little Mermaid, Beast & Beauty and the Renaissance of Disney company this wasn't in the best years, the 1968-1989 is known as "Disney dark age". Hasbro has got the potential.
 
Last edited:


Remathilis

Legend
Not even close. Disney has always had the foundation income from the parks to fall back upon.
Well, sorta. The Disney Rennisance also coincided with Bob Igor's plans to renovate the parks, including the long-unprofitable Euro Disney Park and several smaller American locations that either failed or never began. The main parks were money makers, but it was being squandered on bad expansion ideas.

Long story short: there was a not insignificant window of time where Disney could have ended up a much smaller media player rather than the megacorp it did.
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
Also great loss potential. Mediocre video games easily get crowded out in the market and fail to recoup their development costs, which are substantial compared to novels.
Actually, my understanding is that a middling seller can keep the doors open more than you might think (200,000 total sales is a success, for most companies).
 

Do you have reason to believe that Dark Alliance is less profitable than pulp novels in the 20's...?
I do.

It was universally panned and games which are basically never make money unless there is a meme or fad attached, which wasn't the case here. It has a Metacritic of 53% and generally unless your game has Mario, Zelda, Pokémon or similar in the title getting anywhere below 70% is death. And D&D isn't a brand associated with quality in videogames, largely thanks to WotC/Hasbro consistently giving licenses to losers post-Black Isle/Obsidian. There are some not-bad games sure, and BG3 is shaping up to be a classic (big improvements in most recent patches) on full release so that will help, but the last 15 years of D&D videogames is a story of them being anywhere from ok to awful in most cases.

Anyway I strongly suspect that, if, as WotC directly claimed, Tuque was staffed up like a ln AAA studio (expensive) then it lost money. The deal to get it on day 1 on Game Pass will have helped, but sales have to have been dismal, given that on Steam it peaked at 3k players and rapidly dropped to double digits. Compare that with Warhammer 3 which also was day 1 on Game Pass yet had 156k peak on Steam

So yeah TLDR we have good reason to believe it didn't make money. If it did, expect a sequel, but that seems unlikely.
 

Actually, my understanding is that a middling seller can keep the doors open more than you might think (200,000 total sales is a success, for most companies).
Not with an AAA studio. With an AA and a bit of luck you can work that - you need some bigger hits too though. Obsidian struggled with much better numbers. And the WotC claim is they staffed Tuque up as an AAA studio (they were AA previously). I am very interested to know what Tuque are working on now, if anything.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Not with an AAA studio. With an AA and a bit of luck you can work that - you need some bigger hits too though. Obsidian struggled with much better numbers. And the WotC claim is they staffed Tuque up as an AAA studio (they were AA previously). I am very interested to know what Tuque are working on now, if anything.
They said their ambition was to make AAA games...but that was a AA game.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Not with an AAA studio. With an AA and a bit of luck you can work that - you need some bigger hits too though. Obsidian struggled with much better numbers. And the WotC claim is they staffed Tuque up as an AAA studio (they were AA previously). I am very interested to know what Tuque are working on now, if anything.
And at any rate, my point isn't "Dark Alliance did well," but that I see no reason to believe it was less of a wise financial investment than throwing out a bunch of cheap paperback novels.
 

The Weather Outside Is Frightful!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top