Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9428599" data-attributes="member: 7026594">The Buck Rogers RPG didn't come out until 1990, and it clearly didn't sell.&nbsp; There were a lot of other games on the market, though sure, a few people bought it.&quot;&quot;Why, when it was so desperate for cash, had it invested in a million dollar license for content used by less than 10% of the marketplace?&quot; quoth the Dancey.Let me expand that <a href="https://www.insaneangel.com/insaneangel/RPG/Dancey.html" target="_blank">quote from Dancey</a> you're taking issue with my interpretation of.&quot;I toured a warehouse packed from floor to 50 foot ceiling with products valued as though they would soon be sold to a distributor with production stamps stretching back to the late 1980s. I was 10 pages in to a thick green bar report of inventory, calculating the true value of the material in that warehouse when I realized that my last 100 entries had all been &quot;$0&quot;'s&quot;Which products from prior to 1986 (Gygax's ouster from control being in the Fall of 1985), that you're aware of, were famously poor sellers?&nbsp; I'm happy to stipulate that Gangbusters and The Indiana Jones RPG didn't do very well, but TSR had no need to overprint for cash up front from the Random House deal until much later- the early 90s.&nbsp;&nbsp; When the Random House deal was struck in '79 it allowed TSR to meet demand for the bestselling AD&amp;D hardcovers.&nbsp; From what we read in Game Wizards and elsewhere, it wasn't until years after Williams took over that the core financials went bad enough again that they started using the RH deal that way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 9428599, member: 7026594"] The Buck Rogers RPG didn't come out until 1990, and it clearly didn't sell. There were a lot of other games on the market, though sure, a few people bought it. "[I]"Why, when it was so desperate for cash, had it invested in a million dollar license for content used by less than 10% of the marketplace?" [/I]quoth the Dancey. Let me expand that [URL='https://www.insaneangel.com/insaneangel/RPG/Dancey.html']quote from Dancey[/URL] you're taking issue with my interpretation of. [I]"I toured a warehouse packed from floor to 50 foot ceiling with products valued as though they would soon be sold to a distributor with production stamps stretching back to the [B]late 1980s[/B]. I was 10 pages in to a thick green bar report of inventory, calculating the true value of the material in that warehouse when I realized that my last 100 entries had all been "$0"'s"[/I] Which products from prior to 1986 (Gygax's ouster from control being in the Fall of 1985), that you're aware of, were famously poor sellers? I'm happy to stipulate that Gangbusters and The Indiana Jones RPG didn't do very well, but TSR had no need to overprint for cash up front from the Random House deal until much later- the early 90s. When the Random House deal was struck in '79 it allowed TSR to meet demand for the bestselling AD&D hardcovers. From what we read in Game Wizards and elsewhere, it wasn't until years after Williams took over that the core financials went bad enough again that they started using the RH deal that way. [/QUOTE]

Verification