Roll for Combat reveals the terms of the "sweetheart deal" offered to 3pp

[raniE]

I mean, tons of unknowns there. Which is why I focused on numbers assuming that WotC could move sales to about only 1% of their supposed numbers, which would still mean millions upon millions of dollars.

Right, but thinking they could move sales to 1% of total accounts might mean thinking they can move sales to 20% of subscribers. I think that's far less likely. And I think any third party producer looking at the numbers WotC puts out will see that number of subscribers aren't mentioned. When you mention how many accounts there are in total at your free service with a fairly onerous method of account deletion, but don't mention how many of those are actually subscribed to the optional subscription tiers, that means that it's a low percentage.

 

[dave2008]

Indeed. It's fair to say that contracts rarely use profit as a measure because it's too easy to manipulate, but if you want naked revenue, you need to be reasonable, and be looking at values like 3% and 5%.

I am pretty sure Morus said 10% of total revenue was reasonably common in the industry and I have heard from others that companies charge much more. Also, that fee is only for amounts above 750K, so depending what your revenue is it could end much lower.

That being said, it was not low enough to make it enticing. If this was something WotC really wanted it should have been around 10% general and 5% or less for premium 3PP. I'm not sure what their goal was since the dropped it completely in the first public draft.

 

[Parmandur]

Right, but thinking they could move sales to 1% of total accounts might mean thinking they can move sales to 20% of subscribers. I think that's far less likely. And I think any third party producer looking at the numbers WotC puts out will see that number of subscribers aren't mentioned. When you mention how many accounts there are in total at your free service with a fairly onerous method of account deletion, but don't mention how many of those are actually subscribed to the optional subscription tiers, that means that it's a low percentage.

I've never paid for D&D Beyond, probavly never will (because that's why God invented pens and paper, dangnabbit)dang nabbing, but I would still be reached by Beyond communications because of course I have a free account (it's free, and it gives free stuff). So no, I think you are wildly underestimating the value and reach of that marketing muscle...though, again, it's academic since this isn't happening. But I can see why someone would rationally offer this deal and think they are doing the offeree a favor.

 

[raniE]

I've never paid for D&D Beyond, probavly never will (because that's why God invented pens and paper, dangnabbit)dang nabbing, but I would still be reached by Beyond communications because of course I have a free account (it's free, and it gives free stuff). So no, I think you are wildly underestimating the value and reach of that marketing muscle...though, again, it's academic since this isn't happening. But I can see why someone would rationally offer this deal and think they are doing the offeree a favor.

I have a free account (unless my deletion of it has actually gone through at this point) and I would absolutely not be reached by any of the marketing, because I'm not an active user. I think I'm at most underestimating it by something like half. Most people don't want advertisements from websites.

 

[Parmandur]

I am pretty sure Morus said 10% of total revenue was reasonably common in the industry and I have heard from others that companies charge much more. Also, that fee is only for amounts above 750K, so depending what your revenue is it could end much lower.

That being said, it was not low enough to make it enticing. If this was something WotC really wanted it should have been around 10% general and 5% or less for premium 3PP. I'm not sure what their goal was since the dropped it completely in the first public draft.

I think theybwanted that money, but it was fairly tertiary. Notice that "free advertising to our huge distribution list of account holders" isn't part of the deal now.

I also suspect a missing ingredient here, longterm, is a plan to make Beyond more of a marketplace which isn't there yet. But dollars to donuts, when it is...15-20% off the top for WotC, just like OneBookShelf or a video game store.

 

[Parmandur]

I have a free account (unless my deletion of it has actually gone through at this point) and I would absolutely not be reached by any of the marketing, because I'm not an active user. I think I'm at most underestimating it by something like half. Most people don't want advertisements from websites.

Yeah, I think you are way underestimating here. But even your underestimating puts the poterntial reach at a couple orders of magnitude past what the 3PP are doing on DriveThru or their Kickstarters.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Note that Steam charges 30 percent to sell stuff on there. However, the products are directly uploaded on Steam's servers, people buy it on Steam, and then Steam sends the other 70 percent back to the devopler.

WOTC wanted 15 percent in exchange for some advertising. If a person saw a 3PP product on D&D Beyond, they would have to then buy it somewhere else. That would be a step too far for many. Assuming of course the people on D&D Beyond arn't those "3PP is gross" types.

 

[Haplo781]

Note that Steam charges 30 percent to sell stuff on there. However, the products are directly uploaded on Steam's servers, people buy it on Steam, and then Steam sends the other 70 percent back to the devopler.

WOTC wanted 15 percent in exchange for some advertising. If a person saw a 3PP product on D&D Beyond, they would have to then buy it somewhere else. That would be a step too far for many. Assuming of course the people on D&D Beyond arn't those "3PP is gross" types.

Yeah they're trying to charge app store prices for ... Not an app store.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's. Not. Their. Own. Money.
Stop saying this, please. This phrasing suggests that the OGL1.0 is somehow equivalent to theft or embezzlement or something. Obviously that is wrong, and suggesting it is not helpful.

WotC is trying to re-gate a few bits of IP that they've had out there for 20+ years, even as they have managed to keep massive amounts of other premium IP neatly cordoned off by regular IP law-- and to the entire industry's satisfaction, to boot. There's zero evidence that they've ever lost a single penny, or that they'd stand to gain much. And there's a pretty fair argument that the cost of having that IP out there all this time has more than been made up for by the 3pps and fans who have helped keep the "D&D lifestyle brand" vigorous enough to monetize today.

To underscore this, as I've said before, the majority of the D&D books I have are third party. None of them are books that WotC makes a counterpart to. But those purchases then encourage me to stay in the WotC ecosystem and continue buying WotC books that do appeal to me.

The third party publishers are acting like retention specialists for the brand.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Yeah they're trying to charge app store prices for ... Not an app store.

"Exposure."