Need clarification on "No Retailer Links" rule

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

I seems like some pdf publishers have a rather over-inflated sense of value to ENWorld members.

Probably because you weren't reading closely. When I said I had no delusions about how insiginificant Misfit Studios was to EnWorld, did you not read that? The key part of the point was publisherS. And you also seem to be missing an important part: this new policy doesn't just apply to PDF publishers--it applies to ALL publishers.

Really now, you can choose where to promote until you're blue in the face - and you're certainly not hurting this particular consumer any if you "put more energy into promoting in (other) places". All I can say is that this particular consumer doesn't even consider a product if he doesn't see it announced somewhere at ENWorld (whatever the links are in press releases notwithstanding). Publishers are free to ignore ENWorld members and consumers at their own peril.

Me thinks you're not in marketing, no? Your own preferences aside, I doubt even you will say that "All I can say is that this particular consumer doesn't even consider a product if he doesn't see it announced somewhere at ENWorld (whatever the links are in press releases notwithstanding)" is hardly a condition that will apply to most members here, let alone consumers at large. As such, I further think, once you think on it a bit, you'll be forced to accept that a publisher's concerns likely won't be designed around your rather narrow product promotion criteria of "EnWorld or Bust."

 

[Morrus]

When considering a site for sales, a publisher has to ask whether or not the site will bring them NEW customers, or simply cannibalize their sales from another source. If it's the latter, it's most often not worth it.

That's exactly what the ongoing site integration stuff is about. Over 250,000,000 unique visitors per month. What percentage of them already buy PDFs? A tiny, miniscule percentage.

The integration into the site (for a small example, see the stuff below my avatar, the fact that no new account is needed, it's simply another page at EN World, that sort of thing) is all aimed specifically at getting more of those 250,000,000 visitors each month.

And wait till you see the competitions, the author highlights and things which are all designed to be "community oriented" (for want of a better term). I'm trying my very best to get new people involved - and there are an awful lot of them who aren't yet.

Plus dozens of new registered members every day. Ever increasing traffic. There are certainly potential new customers out there - many, many, many of them. I'm trying to make it as easy as is humanly possible to buy PDFs for them. From this forum page, you can obtain a free product in about 10 seconds - you're already logged in to the store. If someone's reading your post, they can have clicked on your storefront link and have bought a product in moments.

It's making it so convenient that will cause that tiny percentage will increase. Plus getting the community involved via competitions, author highlights and so forth.

 

[Morrus]

Me thinks you're not in marketing, no? Your own preferences aside, I doubt even you will say that "All I can say is that this particular consumer doesn't even consider a product if he doesn't see it announced somewhere at ENWorld (whatever the links are in press releases notwithstanding)" is hardly a condition that will apply to most members here, let alone consumers at large. As such, I further think, once you think on it a bit, you'll be forced to accept that a publisher's concerns likely won't be designed around your rather narrow product promotion criteria of "EnWorld or Bust."

That's a tad hypocritical, Steve. Now your position is that it doesn't matter when a customer says something to you? You were saying something very different earlier. You thought that one fan who agreed with you was very significant.

Or is it only the fans who agree with you that matter? Certainly telling a fn that he's wrong to feel the way he does isn't going to endear you to him!

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

That's a tad hypocritical, Steve. Now your position is that it doesn't matter when a customer says something to you? You were saying something very different earlier. You thought that one fan who agreed with you was very significant.

Or is it only the fans who agree with you that matter?

It's not hypocritical at all. A customer's opinion is a customer's opinion, but it doesn't exist without an external context. We all KNOW that, while EnWorld is definately a valuable promotional tool, ALL gamers bought product without it before it's existence and they would continue to do so were not here, not to mention that the majority of gamers buy product (print or PDF) without consulting this site simply by the fact that gamer Internet presence is just a drop in the pond of the overall gaming market. Simple sales data and the nature of this site versus the nature of the overall market make this a certainty. In that context, one customer saying "feed me through EnWorld or don't feed me at all" is clearly an opinion outside the norm. As any publisher knows, you can't satisfy all customers all the time and the ones outside the norm even less so. This is comparable to a customer saying "make your products compatible with my favorite system or lose me as a customer." However, a customer that says "I like to have my options open and easily presented" is smack dab in the center of the normal consumer mentality. Context.

And then we come to the point that nowhere did I even mention not promoting on EnWorld anymore, PERIOD, as Arnwyn seems to suggest. I was rather explicit in making my point that I believe publishers would still see EnWorld as a place to promote but the risk was that it would not be the focus of energies as it once was because publishers will always prefer being able to promote without restriction. This means the customers who say "EnWorld or nothing" will still see those promotions and be satisfied, but they'll miss out on all the other stuff publishers brought to the table if those publishers decide that they can be spending that extra time elsewhere to better affect their businesses. Customers such as Arnwyn wouldn't be affected at all unless a publisher decided to stop promoting at EnWorld entirely, which is not what I said at all. It's the customers who don't limit themselves as Arnwyn does who will be most affected because, let's face it, our understanding of a consumer's basic nature tells us not all EnWorld members will prefer to be EnWorld shoppers.

 

[Morrus]

This is comparable to a customer saying "make your products compatible with my favorite system or lose me as a customer."

Again I had trouble digesting all that. But this quote stuck out at me. No more so than the opposite example of the customer you said emailed you and agreed with you.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

Again I had trouble digesting all that. But this quote stuck out at me. No more so than the opposite example of the customer you said emailed you and agreed with you.

Not really. Look at it this way: what would you say is representative of a typical consumer, be it here or anywhere else, for any product:

1) Give it to me in my favorite store or don't give it to me at all

or

2) Give me options so that I can compare products and services and choose who I prefer to shop with

One is an extreme opinion that most consumers will disagree with and one is an opinion held by most consumers. In that context, which opinion do you think a retailer or product manufacturer is going to find the most valid and valuable to their business' profitable operation? While people may like to believe that "the customer is always right" is a good rule to live by, basic marketing teaches us it's nothing more than a nice catch phrase while "let the customer always think they are right but actually do what is best" is more appropriate.

And, while considering that, please also consider that my point has always been that EnWorld would still remain one of those options. "Less energy" and "less time" at EnWorld is not the same as "no energy" and "no time."

 

[Morrus]

I believe either opinion to be equally valid. I also believe that you clearly prefer one to the other.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

I believe either opinion to be equally valid. I also believe that you clearly prefer one to the other.

We're not talking about what YOU, as a person believe is valid for another person as a personal decision, Morrus. We're talking about what is valid for making a business decision. We're talking a macro effect. In the grand scheme of how a person must operate their business, the simple facts (yes, facts, not opinions) are that the two stances most certainly are NOT equally valid. If you believe (1) to be as valid as (2), Morrus, you wouldn't do any outside promotions (and that includes allowing external advertisers to buy ad space at your site) and would only be looking to deal entirely with existing EnWorld customers. Are you telling me you consider that to be a valid business strategy for EnWorld?

My personal preference isn't even a matter of interest in such a decision beyond the fact that I prefer to do what's best for my business and my customers and that one of those two options clearly doesn't fit that bill.

 

[Morrus]

Steve, your reasoning just... I don't know how you get to your conclusions. I can't, for the life of me, see how you got from me believing any customer opinion to be valid to:

If you believe (1) to be as valid as (2), Morrus, you wouldn't do any outside promotions (and that includes allowing external advertisers to buy ad space at your site) and would only be looking to deal entirely with existing EnWorld customers.

The logical jumps just bewilder me. And I really, really do see contradictions and incompatibilities in your points and logic (I apologise for using the word "hypocritical" earlier). At this point, I've really concluded that our minds work in ENTIRELY different ways. I'm not going to understand you, or believe that you are right; and you're not going to agree with me, either.

Shall we just leave it at that?

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

Steve, your reasoning just... I don't know how you get to your conclusions. I can't, for the life of me, see how you got from me believing any customer opinion to be valid to:

Because, Morrus, you aren't considering that what may seem an entirely valid basis for purchasing decisions for an INDIVIDUAL is not necessarily valid when considering an entire consumer market. And that's what we're talking about: marketing. Talking about how to sell to one customer, Arnwyn, is not marketing. Talking about how to best sell to a multitude of people is marketing and is what this conversation has been all about. That's where your confusion over my point seems to rest.

The logical jumps just bewilder me. And I really, really do see contradictions and incompatibilities in your points and logic (I apologise for using the word "hypocritical" earlier).

There are no incompatibilities or contradictions because of my above point. Let's try this one more time. Look at these two statements:

1) Arnwyn prefers only to shop based on what is displayed at EnWorld. This is a valid point for Arnwyn, as an individual shopper, because it is not an assumption but is a clear fact about the individual in question and where the only person affected is Arnwyn.

2) Consumers in general prefer only to shop based on what is displayed at EnWorld. This is not a valid point about consumers in general or deciding how to approach one's entire market because it is an assumption that affects one's entire customer base and is far from how the typical consumer chooses to shop, as hard data and common sense clearly points out.

Do you see what I'm saying now? This is what I mean when I say they're not equally valid from either a storefront's point of view or that of a publisher. It works for an individual because they have only themselves to think about but doesn't work for the latter two because they have multitudes of people to consider.