Would Hasbro be better off without D&D?

[Rokes]

Hasbro is the second largest manufacturer of toys. They've got hundreds of brands. Every time I read something about them (like today's Q1 Profits News) the articles new include D&D. They often reference Wizards of the Coast or Magic the Gathering, but never D&D.

With product lines like Marvel, Mr. Potato Head, Chutes & Ladders, Candy Land, Sesame Street, Transformers, & Trivial Pursuit, is D&D too "negative" of a brand?

I hesitate to say "adult," because Marvel is definitely not as youth oriented as something like Candy Land.

Would Hasbro and/or the gaming community benefit from a smaller, more adult oriented game company?

 

[DaveMage]

Would Hasbro and/or the gaming community benefit from a smaller, more adult oriented game company?

Depends what you want out of D&D, but my answer to this question is "no".

I like full color and top production values.

I like multiple daily updates on a webpage.

I like a prepainted plastic miniatures line (which is most-likely in part thanks to Hasbro that it even exists).

 

[Hawkshere]

D&D is--worst case--a zit on Hasbro's bum. Short of being blamed for a school shooting, I don't see the Hasbro board even being aware that D&D exists.

I think the inverse is the real question. :\

 

[Ghendar]

Would Hasbro be better off without D&D??

I have no idea.
What I'm pretty sure of though is that Hasbro doesn't need D&D and they could axe it any time they wanted to.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Provided the D&D line turns a profit, even a relatively small one - no, Hasbro would not be better off without D&D. It's a net positive, however minor.

The brand itself has at least some use to Hasbro, though with so many of its associated rights sold off it's not as much as it could be. I *think* Hasbro still has the board and card game, puzzle and action figure rights, though, so they could make use of them at some point in the future.

On the flip side, Hasbro might be better off with the money it could get from selling the D&D brand to a group of investors who overestimated its earnings potential.

 

[delericho]

No. D&D makes enough money for Hasbro for them to continue producing it. More importantly, the licensing fees for video games, movies, and other things (although currently held by others) are worth a huge amount of money.

Would the gaming community be better off without Hasbro? Well, possibly. For the most part, though, Hasbro have not actually been bad for the game - they seem to mostly leave the WotC team alone, we haven't seen 4e yet, and the Digital Initiative is something that actually might work.

 

[Korgoth]

D&D is--worst case--a zit on Hasbro's bum. Short of being blamed for a school shooting, I don't see the Hasbro board even being aware that D&D exists.

I think the inverse is the real question. :\

And to the latter I think the answer is definitely yes. I think the scuttling of Dragon Magazine proves that point.

D&D as a part of Hasbro is a minor, perhaps almost inconsequential, brand swimming with the corporate sharks. Is it a boon to the hobby and the players that D&D swims with the sharks? I don't think so - sharks can bite. And they're not real concerned about anybody's time-honored traditions, or subculture, or feelings.

I think D&D was best back in the Gygax days... that was when it was most popular, but also the least business-like. It wasn't an "industry"... it was a labor of love and it showed. It was a hobby. It was niche, freewheeling and maybe even a bit subversive. And it was a big fish in a small pond. I'd rather be a big fish in a small pond than a small fish in a big pond. The former is at the top of the food chain, the latter is at the bottom.

D&D is ill-served by being "corporate". At its core, it's the antithesis of corporate. It is a funny little game that you play with your imagination, making up adventures about warriors and dragons and wizards. It's kooky and weird. Every game is different. The whole thrust of the activity has very little to do with modern entertainment culture. D&D can't ever really be "slick". You can try to doll it up with a slick veneer, but it's not fooling the cool kids. It's not even for the cool kids.

 

[Corsair]

I think D&D was best back in the Gygax days... that was when it was most popular

No. So very no.

 

[Meloncov]

Very few people outside the gaming community know that Hasbro owns Dungeons and Dragons. As such, any negative publicity is unlikely to carry over.

 

[Rokes]

Very few people outside the gaming community know that Hasbro owns Dungeons and Dragons. As such, any negative publicity is unlikely to carry over.

Is that because Hasbro makes a point not to include it as part of it's premiere brands? Or is it so small that it isn't worth mentioning?