Pathfinder 1E Did WOTC take one for the team, help Paizo?

[catsclaw227]

Hello all --

I may get torched for this blasphemous idea, but I posted it in another thread, and I feel it deserves some merit for consideration.

They said it. They say the same politic crap that you hear from anyone in managerial position whenever they have to screw someone: we understand some folks will be upset and we want you all to know that we didn't take this matter lightly--nay, we gave it the most sober of contemplation.

I've heard it plenty of times. It's a textbook response.

These kinds of things are very difficult to handle, and the so called "textbook response" was as genuine as they could be without being able to tell us what the [next new thing] is. As stated in a previous thread, the announcement may have been timed to benefit Paizo, so that they could make an necessary announcement at GAMA, but also knowing that they (WOTC) weren't ready to make their own announcement. They've obviously been working on this for a while, because Paizo has had time to prepare with designs, adventures are already being written (or may have already been).

May I be bold enough to state that MAYBE the WOTC team felt some responsiblity to help the smaller company by allowing for an early announcement, knowing full well that they'd get raked and counting on the fact that once the DI comes on board, that all this huff-and-puff would go away and the world would settle down again. Maybe, just MAYBE, they "took one for the team" and let Paizo get out their announcement for GAMA.

Don't you think that if they weren't prepared, and didn't care about Paizo, they would have WAITED on the press release until their DI was ready to be announced? I mean, really, these guys are smart corporate heads. They may not all be gamers, or RPG geeks like me, but they know when to time a press release.

I smell some uncharacteristic kindness on the part of WOTC to allow Paizo to make the announcement early, even though it may sting themselves a bit. Truth is, all of us will check out the DI, and many of us will pay for it. In the end it helps Paizo, and eventually will help themselves.

Just my 2cp.

Catsclaw

 

[Steel_Wind]

More to the point...

Did the "end" of Dungeon and Dragon as a brand and the migration of that "sort of content" to an online subscription service have a lot more to do about liability for subscriptions already paid for and how that would be accounted for?

The more I think about it, the more I think it did. Money is always the very best explanation for anything in a commercial agreement. When its not about money - its usually about the wrong thing.

Here's my reasoning:

1 - WotC announces Dragon and Dungeon to be moved to online paid subscription only.


Much teeth gnashing and wailing about paper vs electronic and .pdf formats, sure, but nowhere NEAR this level of reaction.

Even though Paizo's Erik Mona et al would not have been involved in the new online version, it would have been a spin in terms of PR that would have wholly turned on the nature of delivery, and not in the nature of the death of the magazines or the change in content or direction.

If that's all it was - they would have announced the transfer of both to an online form in a heartbeat - made the changes to content as they liked - and spun the changes later as "necessary".

But they didn't do that at all. So why not?

2- In killing the brands, they avoided hundreds, and later, thousands of inquiries on how the subscriptions already paid for would transfer over.

Maybe Paizo could have paid the money to WotC.

And just as possible, maybe they could not have afforded to do it.

Either way - WotC would have been on the hook for the service, would have had to pay money to implement database transfers - all a big big headache for a charge that Hasbro - longterm - can easily afford.

They also would have been pressure to roll out the service in August/September, and they may not be ready by then.

3. A trigger of all the subscription transfers to WotC could have put Paizo under.


That sort of subscription $$ transfer would have resulted in a triggering of the payment of 300-500k+ in cash from Paizo to WotC. It could have resulted quite possibly in Paizo going under. Certainly - it would have been grim for its cashflow even if they did not go under.

So.

4. They announce the death of the magazines and everybody gets something.


WotC gets:

• No liability for continuing a subscription if Paizo defaults on payment;
• No requirement to implement database transfer of customers and subscription credit;
• No expectation of readers for continuing/ not continuing popular columns and features in the mags that cost WotC money in lost sales of other higher priced product (Adventure Path - I'm looking at you); and,
• No pressure to roll out the service on a fixed timetable in Septmber of 2007
  

Paizo gets:

• No absolute liability to refund transfer the subscription money. This is HUGE;
• The chance to leverage that subscription money ALREADY PAID for store credit or for Pathfinder subscriptions instead of a straight refund. This is ALSO huge; and,
• Positive PR to promote Pathfinder right before GAMA and to the public.
  

This suited everybody's interest much better than some supposed migration of products WotC wanted to already substantially modify for business reasons.

The downside is that it means that WotC is a total villain with fans while Paizo comes off buffing its halo as the good guys.

So yes. I think WotC took one for Paizo here - though to be sure - they have done so as they think it is in their interests to do it. If they wanted Dungeon and Dragon to continue as print publications - all they had to do was extend the license.

 

[Nightfall]

Steel,

I also think perhaps your #1 idea, that Paizo's trying to get some credit to their line MIGHT have a good deal of validity. Whether or not WotC was ready to take the hit or not.

 

[Agamon]

Well said, Steel_Wind. I don't think anyone was trying to be nice to anyone, it was a deal negotiated to be fair to both parties. These are businesses, not friends.

 

[Glyfair]

They've obviously been working on this for a while, because Paizo has had time to prepare with designs, adventures are already being written (or may have already been).

Yes, it's clear that Paizo has known about this for a while (at least since the beginning of March). However, from Erik's comments it appears they have been waiting for WotC to allow the information to be made public. It seems to me that the announcement has been made completely on WotC's time table (given they need a certain lead time to let subscribers know).

However, Paizo has clearly been given more leeway than other in a similiar situation. Code Monkey Publishing was given less than a month's notice that the license wasn't being renewed. We have several month's notice, with Paizo, even discounting their "bonus month."

 

[trancejeremy]

I doubt it. It's just that this was far more important to Paizo, than to WOTC. I mean, Paizo's main business is Dragon and Dungeon. This has a huge impact on them.

OTOH, it was very little to WOTC.

And larger companies also tend to be slower moving, since they have far more bureaucracy to go through.

 

[catsclaw227]

This suited everybody's interest much better than some supposed migration of products WotC wanted to already substantially modify for business reasons.

The downside is that it means that WotC is a total villain with fans while Paizo comes off buffing its halo as the good guys.

So yes. I think WotC took one for Paizo here - though to be sure - they have done so as they think it is in their interests to do it. If they wanted Dungeon and Dragon to continue as print publications - all they had to do was extend the license.

Obviously, they are doing what they can in respect to what is in the best interest of the company (as a whole), and WOTC had the upper hand going in because of the license, as well as being the 800lb gorilla.

They could have done worse, for sure, but the fact that they negotiated this things so that Paizo can continue doing business has a lot to say about how the individuals at WOTC feel about the individuals at Paizo.

I think that the people doing the work at WOTC, as evidenced by their retrospective press release, love the game of D&D, and they want what's best for D&D.

 

[Nlogue]

I was under the impression WotC had NO IDEA that Paizo was producing Pathfinder. It was in-house and not shared with WotC from what I have heard...

So the idea that WotC is doing them a big favor and keeping quiet doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I think it's more likely what was mentioned above by someone else: WotC is a HUGE company sizewise by comparison and moves much slower than Paizo can.

However, the fact that WotC allowed them three - four months to finish up Savage Tide was extremely gracious of WotC to both Paizo and the fans.

 

[Agamon]

I was under the impression WotC had NO IDEA that Paizo was producing Pathfinder. It was in-house and not shared with WotC from what I have heard...

That's interesting, Nick. If that's the case, I wonder what WotC thinks about Paizo having such a great replacement for the mag subscribers' money?

So the idea that WotC is doing them a big favor and keeping quiet doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I think it's more likely what was mentioned above by someone else: WotC is a HUGE company sizewise by comparison and moves much slower than Paizo can.

However, the fact that WotC allowed them three - four months to finish up Savage Tide was extremely gracious of WotC to both Paizo and the fans.

That I'll agree with, that was good of them. But the uproar heard now would have a lot louder if Dungeon was cancelled before the AP was over, so I see it as a PR move (though still a gracious one).

 

[catsclaw227]

I was under the impression WotC had NO IDEA that Paizo was producing Pathfinder. It was in-house and not shared with WotC from what I have heard...

This is interesting news. I wonder if anyone from Paizo can confirm this.