Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 6553618" data-attributes="member: 957">Would you please provide a link to this schedule?Is it?&nbsp; Or is the age of the game simply working against them with their rate of production possibly optimized?&nbsp; Declining over time doesn't mean it isn't optimized.&nbsp; I'm not saying it is optimized.&nbsp; I'm just saying we don't know.Well duh, that's called math.&nbsp; It would take a pretty extreme discount rate for that NPV not to win out big.&nbsp; But do those numbers have anything to do with reality?Wizards has Paizo's numbers?&nbsp; I'm sure they have a strategy.&nbsp;&nbsp; (And I'm sure it includes things not one of us has considered)&nbsp; I'll readily admit that their plan could completely make sense for them.But if the goal is to keep D&amp;D #1 long term, I'm skeptical the plan (as publicly presented) will work.WotC has clearly dropped the ball before.&nbsp; &nbsp; We should give them some credit.&nbsp; We should also have some justified uncertainty.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 6553618, member: 957"] Would you please provide a link to this schedule? Is it? Or is the age of the game simply working against them with their rate of production possibly optimized? Declining over time doesn't mean it isn't optimized. I'm not saying it is optimized. I'm just saying we don't know. Well duh, that's called math. It would take a pretty extreme discount rate for that NPV not to win out big. But do those numbers have anything to do with reality? Wizards has Paizo's numbers? I'm sure they have a strategy. (And I'm sure it includes things not one of us has considered) I'll readily admit that their plan could completely make sense for them. But if the goal is to keep D&D #1 long term, I'm skeptical the plan (as publicly presented) will work. WotC has clearly dropped the ball before. We should give them some credit. We should also have some justified uncertainty. [/QUOTE]

Verification