Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 386365" data-attributes="member: 1054">Run it like a business, not a hobby. I'd expect it to turn a regular profit, and lines which showed no, or only a tiny, profit would be cut back. Low or non-existent profits are a sign the market doesn't want what you're producing.That said, I wouldn't expect to make megabucks. The company should be profitable enough to stay in business and weather lean times. I don't need to be a gazillionaire. I'd keep my salary low (~100K).So long as the profits are good enough, produce at least one book a year I know is going to lose money (but not too much...), just because I want to see it.Place all the 'dead' games (Top Secret, Alternity, Boot Hill, etc) under the OGL.Work towards a true 'generic' D20 core book. D20 Future (generic sci-fi) would be a high priority.Publish an annual, thick, hardcover of 'the best of OGL', cleaned up and made consistent with the core rules. All such material would become 'officially optional'.Focus on crunchy bits. Limit worldbooks to one-off 'cool' settings or let Polyhedron/Dungeon do them. Keep FR around if it can earn its keep.Try to move into MMORPGs. License the D&amp;D engine and possibly settings (Planescape or Spelljammer would be perfect!) for MMORPG use.Try to grow the market by targetting potential gamemasters. A single gamemaster can suck in 4-6 new players.Try to increase awareness among average gamers of what the D20 logo does and doesn't mean. A &quot;Look For The Logo!&quot; marketing campaign.Possibilities: A &quot;D20 Prime&quot; or &quot;D20 Premiere&quot; license, which isn't free, and which requires a high level of quality to earn. A (partial) solution to the problem of picking the good D20 stuff out of the muck. This might cause a major backlash among D20 publishers, however, so I'd float this on industry forums to see if the major D20 publishers would consider it a good thing or a bad thing. I can think of arguments for both.(For some reason, this reminds me of a bit from Citizen Kane:&quot;At this rate, we're going to lose a million dollars a year!&quot;&quot;Well, then, we can keep going another fifty years!&quot;) (Quoted from bad memory)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lizard, post: 386365, member: 1054"] Run it like a business, not a hobby. I'd expect it to turn a regular profit, and lines which showed no, or only a tiny, profit would be cut back. Low or non-existent profits are a sign the market doesn't want what you're producing. That said, I wouldn't expect to make megabucks. The company should be profitable enough to stay in business and weather lean times. I don't need to be a gazillionaire. I'd keep my salary low (~100K). So long as the profits are good enough, produce at least one book a year I know is going to lose money (but not too much...), just because I want to see it. Place all the 'dead' games (Top Secret, Alternity, Boot Hill, etc) under the OGL. Work towards a true 'generic' D20 core book. D20 Future (generic sci-fi) would be a high priority. Publish an annual, thick, hardcover of 'the best of OGL', cleaned up and made consistent with the core rules. All such material would become 'officially optional'. Focus on crunchy bits. Limit worldbooks to one-off 'cool' settings or let Polyhedron/Dungeon do them. Keep FR around if it can earn its keep. Try to move into MMORPGs. License the D&D engine and possibly settings (Planescape or Spelljammer would be perfect!) for MMORPG use. Try to grow the market by targetting potential gamemasters. A single gamemaster can suck in 4-6 new players. Try to increase awareness among average gamers of what the D20 logo does and doesn't mean. A "Look For The Logo!" marketing campaign. Possibilities: A "D20 Prime" or "D20 Premiere" license, which isn't free, and which requires a high level of quality to earn. A (partial) solution to the problem of picking the good D20 stuff out of the muck. This might cause a major backlash among D20 publishers, however, so I'd float this on industry forums to see if the major D20 publishers would consider it a good thing or a bad thing. I can think of arguments for both. (For some reason, this reminds me of a bit from Citizen Kane: "At this rate, we're going to lose a million dollars a year!" "Well, then, we can keep going another fifty years!") (Quoted from bad memory) [/QUOTE]

Verification