Ace32 said:
I think what's missing is the fact that, when I purchase a $30 dollar book, I assume I am paying for all the things inside: the writing, the art, the binding, the printing quality, the cover, etc. etc.
As far as I am concerned - I've already paid for most of the art they are selling me this time around.. lower the price or redo the art. I think it's reasonable?
For those who missed it, here is the crux of the matter.
What are the major costs in production of RPG books?
1.) Writing/rules - since this is a revision, only some of the writing has to be re-done... some of it can stay the same - so WotC does not have to pay for a "fully new" version of the text - it is only paying for a certain percentage of the text and simply re-using the old stuff that didn't need changes. In other words, they're paying a fractional cost for the word count, as opposed to "full price" for the word count.
2.) Artwork - yes, artists - especially good ones - can be darned expensive... but again, most of the artwork is being re-used, so in theory, it's already been paid for.
3.) Editing/Layout - Editing, like writing, only needs to be done on some portions of the work, so again, we get them putting out a book at a fractional editing cost compared to the total word count, rather than the full editing cost compared to the total word count. In layout, however, they have no such luxury - they will have to pay full price for the page count to do layout.
4.) Playtesting - They've had 3 years of "free playtesting" and complaints/feedback from millions of players. This cost is next to nil... not that it's all that big a production cost anyway.
5.) Printing the books (duh).
The expectation, just or not, put forth by Ace32, is that WotC has recouped enough money from the print run of 3.0 to recoup the original cost of writing, artwork, editing, an playtesting. By all accounts, sales of 3E have exceeded WotC's expectations, so I think this is a justifiable assumption... WotC made an initial expenditure of X and sold Y books, netting them Z dollars. Z dollars, then, ought to have been more than X plus the expected profit, if "sales have exceeded expectations," since it seems reasonable that before laying out X dollars, WotC expected to recoup X plus reasonable profits. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS IN FACT TRUE, I'm just pointing out that this seems to be Ace32's line of reasoning.
He is now annoyed at 3.5e. Why?
Costs for writing will be way down.
Costs for artwork will be way down.
Costs for editing will be way down.
Cost for layout will be about the same.
Cost to print should be about the same - I'll assume that 3.5e will be printed on a scale sufficiently large to get WotC approximately the same printing cost as 3E.
Net result: Cost to produce the book is considerably less, because artists, writers, and editors costs (three major cost factors) will be substantially reduced. Therefore, WotC's expected profit per book - since the price is not changing - will be substantially increased.
I should point out that one of the basic tenets of Business 101 is: "Price has nothing to do with Production Costs. Price has everything to do with 'what the market will bear.' It is your responsiblity as a business owner to keep Production Costs underneath the income you will get from selling the product at the price point the market will bear. Once you get under that, it doesn't matter how far under you get - the price doesn't have to drop."
WotC is simply doing what is good for business - cutting costs while continuing to sell at the same price point. It costs them much less to produce 3.5e than 3e due to "re-use" of material.
I respect their decision to do what they're doing - keep in mind that sales of 3.5e will probably not be near sales figures of 3e, so they have to make a higher profit per unit to turn the same total profit... and they have chosen to do that by reducing production costs. Obviously, as a "one-on-one" transaction, it looks bad for the consumer... your $30 is paying for "less work" on the PHB you receive, but when taken in aggregate (as WotC will take it), they may be turning the same amount of profit per unit of work because while they are doing less work, they are also selling fewer copies.
So I don't know that it's a "screw job" - it's just business. To put it another way, look at it from WotC's perspective - for 3e, you had 30 customers and each paid you $5 for putting in 3 hours of work and spent $60 on materials. After recouping material costs, you find that you have made a profit of $90 for 3 hours of work - $30 per hour.
Now suppose that for 3.5e, you know that you will only have 20 customers... and it will take you 2 hours of work to put out the product. If you spend the same $60 on materials, what happens? You get $100 from the customers and spend $60 on materials... giving you a $40 profit. Since you worked for 2 hours, that makes your profit $20 per hour - that's LESS than the $30 per hour you were working for before! Since you can't do it any faster, you have to find another way to cut costs - you have to spend less on materials. Since you want to make $30 per hour, same as before, and you'll work for 2 hours - that's $60, and you know you'll get $100 from your customers, that means you can only spend $40 on materials, instead of $60.
Now you can see it from both ends. The 3e customer sees the result of $60 in materials and 3 hours of work. The 3.5e customer sees the result of $40 in materials and 2 hours of work and cries, "hey, I'm getting less for my money!" The 3e producer sees $30 per hour in both cases and says, "I'm getting paid the same in both cases."
So yes, you are getting less in 3.5e... but it's not because WotC is out to screw you, it's because they're trying to maintain the same "pay level" they have had all along. They're not making more money on the deal than they were before. Does that make sense, Ace32?
I know a lot of people will be *shocked* to see me defending WotC, as I seem to have a reputation as a WotC-basher (and perhaps deservedly so), but I can't fault them in this case. I *don't* know that I will be shelling out for the new books... maybe I'm one of the ten that doesn't re-up in the example above, and it's my fault, then, that you are getting less bang for your buck. Rail at those of us who AREN'T upgrading immediately for "screwing you" - not WotC.
It's a result of the way economies of scale function.
--The Sigil
