Need clarification on "No Retailer Links" rule

[Morrus]

Ah no, see, you've missed my point, Steve. You're explaining something obvious, but which has no connection with what I was saying. In fact, you seem to think I'm saying something other than what I am.

As I said, we're not going to make each other understand our respective positions, and those positions clearly differ. I'm not sure that continued confused "debate" serves much purpose, although I have enjoyed it.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

As I said, we're not going to make each other understand our respective positions, and those positions clearly differ. I'm not sure that continued confused "debate" serves much purpose, although I have enjoyed it.

No worries. Until they make Morrus to Steve and Steve to Morrus dictionaries it is then ...

 

[direpress]

No worries. Until they make Morrus to Steve and Steve to Morrus dictionaries it is then ...

odd you should mention that, i'd been planning on releasing them as PnM items. over ten thousand translations, only $0.49 each! from consumer research terms to marketing concepts, collect them all! trade them with your friends!

 

[WilliamAndersen]

EN World is a complicated place. I just spent 10 minutes trying to discuss different models of what the site would be like, but I scrapped what I typed because it became clear that EN World is the bard of the internet. It tries to do a little of everything.

If the gaming industry is a small town, then EN World is the friendly pub - O'Morrissey's Tavern - where people hang out. Folks can come here, get a drink and a bite to eat, watch the games on TV, and talk about the local gossip. It's a cool place, because everyone in the town, even people who own liquor stores, or restaurants, or TV stores, come here for the community.

<major snip>

Thank you! That was a very entertaining explanation...

William
ComStar
Publishers of Encyclopedia Eldoria and other great games
http://www.comstar-media.com
http://www.comstar-games.com

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

odd you should mention that, i'd been planning on releasing them as PnM items. over ten thousand translations, only $0.49 each! from consumer research terms to marketing concepts, collect them all! trade them with your friends!

Just remember to send royalty checks to myself and Morrus.

 

[WilliamAndersen]

You're welcome to think that. Considering some of the clients I've helped run such studies for on more than one occassion include the Royal Bank of Canada, Lottario, Microsoft, Bell Canada and Kodak (not to mention Amazon's well-documented reasons for protecting their one-click patents), you'll understand if I tend to agree with them rather than your supposition without information. Morrus is welcome to do what he likes, but your statement above which chooses to ignore information that is pretty much a staple amongst some of the world's most successful online vendors is nothing less than willfull ignorance. You don't even have to take my word for it as you can find all this out if you spend enough time with Google.

Steve,

I respect your background and expertise. Online marketing is not my area of expertise, and I would not suppose to know as much about the subect as you do.

I am not sure I understand why Morrus should be overly concerned if this policy were to deflate sales at RPGNow or DT:RPG (which are now competitors). I would think he would want to encourage vendors to sign up for his store (pay the 99 dollars), and then get the sale with fewer clicks by linking to ENSHOP to get the sale.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding why the information you are providing is not further reason for Enworld to want to do this... decrease sales to competition, increase likelihood that vendors will want to be here (to get sales with less clicks by linking direct to ENSHOP).

I apologize if I am not understanding the obvious...

William

 

[Bardsandsages]

Okay, let me try, then.

Having three stars gives customers the impression that the product has already been reviewed, and that the reviewer found it average. There are some customers who, given the plethora of options, will not buy a product that has received a review of less than favorable.

Even if the "No reviews available" means they decide to wait until a review comes in, that's still a potential future sale, whereas someone who disdains a product because it's "merely" average may well never look at it again.

I'd submit to you that it's better--for publisher and storefront both--to be quite up-front about the fact that a procuct has not been reviewed, vs. a "default" rating that may cause confusion and/or false impressions.

Can we go back to this? Because it got lost in the thread, and I don't think it was actually answered. So there is no review process, and products are getting a "default" average rating? :\

 

[Morrus]

Can we go back to this? Because it got lost in the thread, and I don't think it was actually answered. So there is no review process, and products are getting a "default" average rating? :\

It's OK - I need no further persuading on that point. It will be done.

 

[Bardsandsages]

It's OK - I need no further persuading on that point. It will be done.

OK, I feel better now.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

I am not sure I understand why Morrus should be overly concerned if this policy were to deflate sales at RPGNow or DT:RPG (which are now competitors). I would think he would want to encourage vendors to sign up for his store (pay the 99 dollars), and then get the sale with fewer clicks by linking to ENSHOP to get the sale.

My point wasn't so much about where the deflated sales are coming from so much as the fact that they'd happen, regardless. If sales go down because of a policy here or anywhere else, the nature of publishing is such that the publisher will try and make it up by putting more energy into some place that allows them to compensate. Say you find you simply aren't getting as many of your sales here because most of your customers have a long history with RPGnow or DriveThru and simply want to consolidate their provider (as just one possibility--it's not the only scenario in either direction of the debate, to be sure.) Now, there's not much you can really do about that because of the policy which means you've got to put more energy into promoting at another site that allows you to push your alternate vendors, be that a single alternate site or a bunch. While people looking for the perceived "faster fix" (meaning the ILLUSION of less clicks of buying at EnWorld--it will actually be no faster than following a direct to another provider) works for Morrus' purposes, as you point out, it may not work for yours, mine or any number of other publishers who may decide that EnWorld's store isn't where they want to focus their sales efforts, for whatever reasons.

You'd not be trying to push RPGnow, Drivethru or any other site. You wouldn't even be snubbing EnWorld. You'd simply be a publisher reacting to the fact that a policy limiting how you can post links mean you're limiting the options you can offer customers here.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding why the information you are providing is not further reason for Enworld to want to do this... decrease sales to competition, increase likelihood that vendors will want to be here (to get sales with less clicks by linking direct to ENSHOP).

Like I said, on the front end it works to EnWorld's advantage, but limiting sales venues simply doesn't work for product providers (that would be we publishers) because the nature of customers is to enjoy easy access to options. They like to shop around. So, keep in mind that while while this policy will likely decrease sales to competitors, that doesn't automatically mean any publisher's sales will simply shunt over to here and stay the same or even increase (although the latter can certainly happen too)--and if that is the case, what's the incentive for publishers to hang out here beyond the capacity of pushing their product rather than spending time elsewhere that allows them to do both? Consider the downside that such a possibility would have to the overall site over the long run.

This isn't a definate scenario for any and all publishers, but it is indeed a possibility and a strong one if things I've seen happen in other industries are any indication.

It basically boils down to one irrefutalbe fact of marketing to our sort of market: the wider you cast your net, the more likely you are to catch more fish. And why would you not want to cast your net wide if you already know you're sitting on a good fishing hole?