Need clarification on "No Retailer Links" rule

[GMSkarka]

But, to use a lot of other peoples' arguments here -- the purpose of this site is not to generate sales for publishers; it never has been - it is to provide information to people.

Framing this decision as one of Journalistic Integrity would have more resonance if it wasn't a well-known fact that you're launching your own PDF sales site.

This policy is nothing more than an attempt to drive traffic towards your new sales site, as an artificial way to compensate for late entry into a market with 4 large-scale competitors, and several smaller ones.

I would argue that creating ill will among the publishers is probably not the best way to help your store get its legs.

 

[Morrus]

Framing this decision as one of Journalistic Integrity would have more resonance if it wasn't a well-known fact that you're launching your own PDF sales site.

Journalisitic integrity? It is no more than a preference. Nobody mentioned journalistic integrity. And it was no more than a late side-thought in the thread, hardly the basis of the decision, so, please refrain from pretending it is any more than that. And please refrain from the snideness.

Stop looking for things to argue about, please, Gareth. Your continual antagonism about everything is getting really old, really fast.

This policy is nothing more than an attempt to drive traffic towards your new sales site, as an artificial way to compensate for late entry into a market with 4 large-scale competitors, and several smaller ones.

Errr... yes. Was that supposed to be some kind of insightful revelation?

I've already mentioned that this is a change in emphasis for EN World. This site is taking a new direction, although not as vastly different as some people in this thread would have you believe. As I said to James, the policy is no different to the policy at RPGNow. Something which he agreed with and found perfectly reasonable.

Looks, James is cool with it, Gareth (we do talk you know, and I've not hidden anything from him), so you may as well be. He's the person with the most vested interest in what's happening. Plus, believe it or not, I strongly think that I can get new people to try out PDFs.

And no, I didn't imagine for a second that you'd be signing up to the new store.

 

[Morrus]

This policy is stepping entirely back from that and will result in a reduction in this fora's perceived functionality--I wouldn't be surprised if more publishers stop spending so much time here because a large amount of their incentive to do so is being removed.

And that's OK, really. I don't want to provide "incentives" for people to spend time here; if I'm having to do that, then perhaps those people don't want to be here in the first place?

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

And that's OK, really. I don't want to provide "incentives" for people to spend time here; if I'm having to do that, then perhaps those people don't want to be here in the first place?

When it comes to dealing with professionals, you're pretty much ALWAYS dealing with incentives when looking to get them to spend their free time at one's site. I'm not talking about cash incentives, but SOME kind of incentive that makes them come here and chat rather than working on product or promoting through other sites.

Previously the incentive to spend time here and talk to customers was knowing that they could also generate sales here, but if EnWorld becomes some place where they can only post half-way functional press releases, the advantage of EnWorld over their own site (which they can just as easily use to converse with customers) drops considerably. In fact, a lot of time and effort would be saved by just posting something like "INSERT DATE HERE News Update: Misfit Studios releases new product! Click LINK HERE for details!"--if a company is forced to redirect anyway, why bother to generate conversation here when it is much easier to keep it all at one location (the publisher's site)? Reduced returns for the publishers will likely result in reduced effort here as a simple matter of time and resource management.

The value of sites such as RPG.net and Gamingreport.com will increase because they allow the same degree of contact with comparably-sized groups of customers while retaining that incentive to publishers.

 

[Roudi]

This policy is nothing more than an attempt to drive traffic towards your new sales site, as an artificial way to compensate for late entry into a market with 4 large-scale competitors, and several smaller ones.

This is no different than sports stadiums or movie theatres that disallow outside food and drink in their venues. You might argue that it's artificial, but it's certainly a very logical step to for such a business to take. You cannot fault a business for doing everything it can to give itself the greatest chances of success.

I would argue that creating ill will among the publishers is probably not the best way to help your store get its legs.

All he's asked is for vendors to refrain from promoting what will be the new EN store's main competition. If you think that creates "ill will" between ENWorld and publishers, then I think said publishers ought to re-evaluate their reliance on ENWorld.

 

[sjmiller]

I have a silly question which might already be answered, but what the heck. I am wondering what the policy is with regard to things like CafePress. For example, I am in the process of creating a large number of graphics to create a Gamer's Accessories line that I plan to imprint on items sold through CafePress.

Now, from what I understand none of these things are, or ever will be, sold at an ENStore website, so pointing to that is not an option. I for one cannot now, nor can I in the forseeable future, afford the time or money to maintain a "company" website. I plan on using the CafePress website as my main site. Product announcements, newsletters, and the like are all generated from there. It would be, in effect, my company website.

So, how could I point to my company website if it is, in fact, a storefront?

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

This is no different than sports stadiums or movie theatres that disallow outside food and drink in their venues. You might argue that it's artificial, but it's certainly a very logical step to for such a business to take. You cannot fault a business for doing everything it can to give itself the greatest chances of success.

They do, however, allow those outside companies the chance to purchase the product inside. They also allow outside promotions to be represented within (say, a McDonalds in an ice rink still selling cups with Monopoly pieces.) This brings me back to my vendor account concept.

 

[GMSkarka]

Stop looking for things to argue about, please, Gareth. Your continual antagonism about everything is getting really old, really fast.

With all due respect, I think you should note that I've only posted twice on this thread. Once to express disbelief at your ridiculous policy of barring publishers from even mentioning other retailers, and the post to which you replied. Hardly "continual antagonism", despite your obvious prejudice.

I tell you what: I'll stop my "continual antagonism" when you stop engaging in behavior which is a direct attack on my livelihood. Fair?

Looks, James is cool with it, Gareth (we do talk you know, and I've not hidden anything from him), so you may as well be.

James' opinion on the matter has no bearing on how this decision impacts Adamant Entertainment....which is my sole concern here. My work for James is solely limited to specific areas, and your new policy doesn't affect that, so I'm not even thinking along those lines. I'm purely considering this from the point of view of a publisher who makes my living from the sale of PDF products.

And no, I didn't imagine for a second that you'd be signing up to the new store.

Again with the prejudice.

Adamant Entertainment is one of the top 15 PDF publishers in this business, and I consider every sales option. The fact that you've written us off without a second thought is...disappointing, to say the least.

 

[Morrus]

With all due respect, I think you should note that I've only posted twice on this thread. Once to express disbelief at your ridiculous policy of barring publishers from even mentioning other retailers, and the post to which you replied. Hardly "continual antagonism", despite your obvious prejudice.

I wasn't referring to just this thread, Gareth and you know it. And you do know how people find your manner, so please don't even try to play innocent. Do you know how often I'm asked to ban you? Please change your manner.

I tell you what: I'll stop my "continual antagonism" when you stop engaging in behavior which is a direct attack on my livelihood. Fair?

No, you'll stop your continual antagonism or go elsewhere. Clear?

Adamant Entertainment is one of the top 15 PDF publishers in this business, and I consider every sales option. The fact that you've written us off without a second thought is...disappointing, to say the least.

Because you've been very, very aggressive in your references to the concept of EN World opening a PDF store for months now, even BEFORE I ever decided to. Thus I couldn't even imagine you wanting to sign up. If that's not the impression you intended to convey, then I apologise for the mistake, but it sure as hell comes across like that.

 

[jaerdaph]

Customers like to buy things quickly and without fuss--the more you can quickly lead them by the hand to finalize their purchase, the happier they'll be.

Which wasn't a problem when RPGNow split all it's categories into two sites...