Ingram Sales Numbers of D&D 4th Edition Books

[darjr]

Even if Ingrams numbers suck the OP does raise a real good question, what does WOTC mean in their court documents by "Core Rule Books"? We assume they mean the PH, DMG, and MM, but if they actually mean pretty much the whole line? Well, that would change the "picture" of WOTC dominance even more drastically than it did when we discovered that WOTC serves no where near "6 Million D&D gamers World Wide".

So if their "Core Books" do include pretty much their entire line, that would put WOTC sales much closer in line with Paizo sales.

So knowing exactly what definition WOTC used in that court document is rather important.

Treebore, come on now. If you read the document it's clear they mean the first three books. They even state that those books were on their third printing. Then they start to talk about phb2.

Did you really just convince yourself that paizo and wotc sales are equivalent? Maybe someday. They certainly do seem to be doing a lot of things right.

 

[JeffB]

I used to work at a business that used Ingram as a distr. for our products. I took Ingram's orders for our product and then entered the Ingram orders into our sales database/order system so we could fulfill them. I was constantly on Ingram's site looking at these figures-Their numbers are beyond whacked. I would not trust any kind of numbers they supply based on what I've seen.

 

[Treebore]

Treebore, come on now. If you read the document it's clear they mean the first three books. They even state that those books were on their third printing. Then they start to talk about phb2.

Did you really just convince yourself that paizo and wotc sales are equivalent? Maybe someday. They certainly do seem to be doing a lot of things right.

I agree, the doubt comes from the fact that their "facts" have been proven to be misleading. IE not factual at all, but loose interpretation. They have spent years cultivating the perception that they had 6 Million customers, which in turns creates the perception that they are selling millions of books, especially the core 3.

So when your integrity is shown to be false, it calls your definition of everything into question, including print runs. Are they saying 3 print runs because they are actually on their third print run, or is their "perception" that since they will be on their third print run at some day in the future, they can loosely interpret that to mean they can then say its in the third printing.

I agree that they shouldn't be lying, especially in court documents, but I have seen too many companies blatantly lie in court ever since ENRon for me to believe even things stated in court documents, especially since WOTC has clearly revealed that they have no problems creating false perceptions, for years.

So yes, WOTC should mean what their words seem to mean, but now that I know they engage in deceptive practices, it calls their integrity into question at all levels.

Lets just say I am now doubly glad I sold off my Hasbro stock when I did.

 

[Twowolves]

Did you really just convince yourself that paizo and wotc sales are equivalent? Maybe someday. They certainly do seem to be doing a lot of things right.

Where in Treebore's post did he mention Paizo at all?

Y'know, I hear the chicken entrails work about as accurately as well.

Perhaps we should try tea leaves? Careful, might see a grim.

I hear a dog bark at the full moon tonight, that means that 4e is a failure apparently.

Good grief.

So, when people speculate about WotC's sales, you dismiss them saying they don't know anything,and are only guessing, and when someone finds some actual numbers, flawed as the OP admits they are, you STILL dismiss them out of hand?

I like the way you've rearranged the deck chairs on the USS D&D there.

 

[darjr]

Where in Treebore's post did he mention Paizo at all?

Uh What?

So if their "Core Books" do include pretty much their entire line, that would put WOTC sales much closer in line with Paizo sales.

Right there.

 

[darjr]

I agree, the doubt comes from the fact that their "facts" have been proven to be misleading. IE not factual at all, but loose interpretation. They have spent years cultivating the perception that they had 6 Million customers, which in turns creates the perception that they are selling millions of books, especially the core 3.

Waitaminute. Are you saying that their facts in a court document can't be trusted, but yet you use them as facts to prove your own point?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Are you saying this is just sales numerology?

No, he's saying that nobody knows if 4e is doing well, because nobody has any hard numbers.

And if you happen to present any hard numbers, then you should just shut up.

 

[The Little Raven]

Waitaminute. Are you saying that their facts in a court document can't be trusted, but yet you use them as facts to prove your own point?

He's also citing their claim of "6 million D&D players world-wide" to support his claim that 4e is selling horribly (since it isn't reaching even 1/6 of that number).

Funny how their facts can't be trusted, unless they dovetail nicely with his preconceived notions.

 

[Treebore]

Waitaminute. Are you saying that their facts in a court document can't be trusted, but yet you use them as facts to prove your own point?

Uh, yeah. Its quit obvious that when they put we have "6 Million D&D fans World Wide" and then in the same document that they have only sold "hundreds of thousands of our core books" that one statement or the other is seriously misleading when they cannot both be true.

At least when they weren't saying that "over 35 Million people have played D&D" they didn't try to pass that off as their current fan base.

 

[Truename]

I want to add my voice to the chorus: nobody knows how many books have been sold, not even WoTC. Let me explain.

WoTC knows how many books they have sold to bookstores. Sort of. Bookstores are allowed to return books that don't sell, so publishers make a guess (called a "reserve") about how many will be returned to them.

Okay, so WoTC doesn't know how many people have purchased books. They only know what they've sent to bookstores, and they've made a guess about how many of those will be returned. What about the bookstores? Surely they know how many books they have sold?

Yes, they do (probably). But they're not telling. In order to tell how many books have actually been sold to customers, you'd have to call every bookseller on the planet (not just bookstores) and get their sales data.

Of course, that's impossible. But there are companies that survey bookstores to try to garner that information. One of them is Bookscan, run by Nielsen, who also has those famous "Nielsen boxes" that track TV viewing. The Nielsen data will tell you how well your book is doing, in typical bookstores, relative to other books. It won't tell you actual sales numbers, although Nielsen acts as though it does.

Let me illustrate. I'm the author of a fairly popular software development book. My most recent royalty statement is for Q4 '08. Here's what the various sources say about my sales in that quarter (I've rounded the numbers to maintain my anonymity):

Ingram: no data
Bookscan: ~650 sales
My royalty statement: ~3,700 sold to bookstores - ~700 reserve = ~3,000 minimum assumed to sell

As you can see, it's all a bunch of voodoo. The only people who have a clue as to how many books have been sold is WoTC, and even they don't know for sure.