Liz Schuh on Dragon/Dungeon moving to the web

[Wye]

And here is the crux of the issue:

...There are a lot more eyeballs on the Web. We look at our own Website, and we have over 13 million unique visitors in a year. That's a lot of eyeballs; that's a pretty powerful way to reach people.

We've heard the "eyeballs" comment before, but this time a number is attached to it. If only 1% of visitors actually pay for the subscription that's 130,000 subscriptions! A quick search at Paizo's website and I have the total paid circulation of Dragon magazine at 62,000 in 2005.

So, it doesn't really matter how many people doesn't like it, only 0.5% has to buy in for them to make more money than the print magazines (assuming they charge the same). Heck, even if every single current Dragon subscriber/buyer doesn't spend a penny on the DI it wouldn't make a dent on their calculations.

I like our capitalist system, it just sucks that this time I got the short end of the stick.

 

[Glyfair]

We've heard the "eyeballs" comment before, but this time a number is attached to it.

A number I question. Say I look at the website at work, at home and on the game club computer. That means I'm 3 "unique visitors."

 

[billd91]

And here is the crux of the issue:

We've heard the "eyeballs" comment before, but this time a number is attached to it. If only 1% of visitors actually pay for the subscription that's 130,000 subscriptions! A quick search at Paizo's website and I have the total paid circulation of Dragon magazine at 62,000 in 2005.

So, it doesn't really matter how many people doesn't like it, only 0.5% has to buy in for them to make more money than the print magazines (assuming they charge the same). Heck, even if every single current Dragon subscriber/buyer doesn't spend a penny on the DI it wouldn't make a dent on their calculations.

I like our capitalist system, it just sucks that this time I got the short end of the stick.

It also suggests there's a market for the digital content that wouldn't have been drawn away by Dragon/Dungeon subscriptions. Since putting out the print magazines was at Paizo's expense rather than WotC's, again, what's the hold up to allowing them to continue... other than cutting out competition and controlling the intellectual property.

I am beginning to wonder if part of the impetus for the change was to keep the materials written by WotC R&D completely within WotC. I wonder if any of them now have agreements not to publish materials through any other outlet... including through Pathfinder.

 

[Vigilance]

Actually, I think it's a fine question. It's just the wording and slant that isn't fine.

I'm not too fond of the answer, personally, but it's the same company response we've been getting. "If you prefer print, buy some of our other products then."

I think the answer means "we'll be compiling the best of the web material yearly".

In other words, best of Dungeon and Best of Dragon, yearly, in hardcover.

 

[Wye]

It also suggests there's a market for the digital content that wouldn't have been drawn away by Dragon/Dungeon subscriptions. Since putting out the print magazines was at Paizo's expense rather than WotC's, again, what's the hold up to allowing them to continue... other than cutting out competition and controlling the intellectual property.

As I mentioned in another thread, I don't believe these two events are related in any other aspect but timing.

My guess is that things didn't go well at the re-negotiation table for the licenses. Thus, they "both agreed" to not continue the relationship--It's the same as if my landlord increases my rent, then we'll both agree that I better move somewhere else.

In a completely unrelated part of the building other people were mulling about their new assignment: a subscriber-based section for the website. Later that day, both groups cross paths in the hallway and someone says, "Hey, about your online whatchamacallit, Dragon and Dungeon are back home, go crazy with them."

And, even though the people responsible for the DI liked Paizo's lemonade very much, they now find themselves with the very lemons Paizo was using, as available ingredients for their new pastry. Not using such juicy lemons would be foolish, so now they are making lemon tart. (Here I'm giving a lot more credit to the DI than I intend because I love lemon tart; online trashcan-junk-generators, not so much.)

 

[Glyfair]

I think the answer means "we'll be compiling the best of the web material yearly".

In other words, best of Dungeon and Best of Dragon, yearly, in hardcover.

That's not how it reads. Yes, we know they are considering it based on other comments. This answer doesn't address that, IMO. It seems to be a general reassurance that they aren't moving completely away from print yet.

I was discussing things was the owner of one of my FLGS and he feels he's going to lose a lot of traffic by this move. He feels that WotC has made the first step of moving completely away from the hobby game stores.

 

[Raven Crowking]

You may want to make absolutely clear that the whole Luddite thing comes from the interviewer and NOT from the WoTC person.

It is a very common practice for corporations to release advertising as "news". One of the hallmarks of this is that the interviewer is never named.

 

[WizarDru]

A number I question. Say I look at the website at work, at home and on the game club computer. That means I'm 3 "unique visitors."

A valid point. Of course, the devil's advocate would note that if you're that attached to the website, you're much more likely to be a paying customer than some guy who only visits from one machine....and even if every visitor was using three machines, that's still 4 million+ unique visitors. And that doesn't include multiple people using the same computer: my wife and kids and I share one computer for doing little else but web-browsing. It's a certainty that while only one IP address would be marked, at a minimum two of us would hit the site. But we have no accurate way of tracking actual number of users versus either of those metrics.

 

[kenmarable]

It is a very common practice for corporations to release advertising as "news". One of the hallmarks of this is that the interviewer is never named.

Uh... I don't think any of the articles on ICv2 are by-lined (at least none of the ones I've read offhand).

And I'm pretty confident all of them aren't purchased advertisements disguised as articles.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Once again the 'Why not produce the web-based content and the print magazines at the same time?' question is sidestepped with an irrelevant non-answer. It's beginning to look undeniably like it's WotC policy not to give a genuine response to this one.

It still reads as if they feared the competition. After all, a lot of people were saying that Paizo made the best Dragons and Dungeons ever. At least, I heard it all the time here.