Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 5814330" data-attributes="member: 10479"><p>That's WotC's call and they've announced a new edition.&nbsp; Even if you argue that everyone who signed up for DDI did it to receive Dragon and Dungeon magazine, and further argue that the documented DDI subscribers numbers show an increase from 50K to 70K (approx) readership, or even if you go further still and claim that there are an additional 30K subscribers to Dragon and Dungeon that are undocumented, you'd have to ask if the additional cost to produce that increase warrants calling it a success.&nbsp; I wouldn't personally argue for that premise but in that light it doesn't seem we'd even need a new edition announcement to have a fair idea of the answer.&nbsp; It's like you're arguing that you should strip away the number of expected Dragon and Dungeon subscribers to determine how many documented purely DDI subscribers we should count to determine the success of DDI.&nbsp; To whit, your argument seems to imply that an analysis of DDI subscribers should be taking the 70K (approx) then remove 50K expected number of magazine faithful and determine that there are really only 20K documented DDI subscribers.&nbsp; I'm not quite sure how your arguement is portraying the success you conclude.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Mark CMG, post: 5814330, member: 10479"] That's WotC's call and they've announced a new edition. Even if you argue that everyone who signed up for DDI did it to receive Dragon and Dungeon magazine, and further argue that the documented DDI subscribers numbers show an increase from 50K to 70K (approx) readership, or even if you go further still and claim that there are an additional 30K subscribers to Dragon and Dungeon that are undocumented, you'd have to ask if the additional cost to produce that increase warrants calling it a success. I wouldn't personally argue for that premise but in that light it doesn't seem we'd even need a new edition announcement to have a fair idea of the answer. It's like you're arguing that you should strip away the number of expected Dragon and Dungeon subscribers to determine how many documented purely DDI subscribers we should count to determine the success of DDI. To whit, your argument seems to imply that an analysis of DDI subscribers should be taking the 70K (approx) then remove 50K expected number of magazine faithful and determine that there are really only 20K documented DDI subscribers. I'm not quite sure how your arguement is portraying the success you conclude. [/QUOTE]

Verification