Re: [DL] Magazines (Really Long!)

["John Goff" <JohnGoff@deadlands.com>]

I'm up early--and likely a wee bit off my usual happy-go-lucky self as a
result, so I'll answer a few comments below to put things in perspective.
;-)

Let me start by saying I appreciate everyone's input and suggestions. They
are evidence of the fact you all care about the game, the setting, and where
it's going.

If I present an argument or evidence contrary to an idea or point you've
posted either now or in the past, don't take it as a personal slight. I
figure you guys would like to know where we're coming from and why we may
not follow up on a suggestion made or an idea you've presented.

Gryphon, I chose your message to address most of these issue with because it
presented a number of the ideas I've seen posted fairly concisely and all in
one convenient package. Please, like I said above, don't take this in anyway
negatively. I just thought you guys would appreciate the view from this side
of the word processor. :-)

> I don't know if the advertising would be that hard to find.  I can't
imagine
> PEG having THAT much trouble promoting other companies considering their
> close past relationships with Chaosium, AEG, and White Wolf.

Here's a couple of problems with that. Most game companies are _very_
reluctant to advertise in another company's house organ. Advertising dollars
aren't very widespread in the gaming business, so what are there are held
more dear than gold. Few companies are willing to spend them in a forum
dedicated entirely to another company's products.

To get those advertisers, we'd have to open up the publication to other
systems/settings. Which dilutes the product--which turns it into a gaming
magazine--which leads to problems I mentioned earlier. :-)

>
> Add to that dealers, games selling web sites, fiction publishers, etc that
I
> think would also possibly advertise.  I might be wrong.  This is not far
> from my education background but it certainly wasn't my concentration...

Also, see my comments regarding Shadis' success not with _getting_ those
advertisements, but getting paid for them. Now, I don't know which companies
they had trouble with--and I'd suspect it's actually none of the ones listed
above--but we'd need way more than the three or four companies where we've
got close contacts to make it worth while...

The usual business model doesn't always work when you get down to the
"little fish" end of the economic food chain. When bills have to get paid
and cash flow is short, where do the cuts get made? Rent, electric and phone
first, then salaries, then "other." Guess where advertising falls? ;-)

> True, but you're talking about one full time guy there with moderately
> priced desktop publishing software. $20k or so if you get someone green
and
> talented.  They're out there. Assuming $2 profit per mag (on a $6 cover
> price plus what you can get in advertising) you've got to convince 10,000
> people a year to buy the book.

Well...a $2 profit isn't doable with a $6 book in this business. Let's say
after everything has been said and done, the book costs us $2 to make
(which, although I can't quote exact figures, I can guarantee it won't)
after you figure art, content, and printing costs. We move that book to the
distributor chain for around $2.70 or so--not the cover price.

That means we get actually only 70 cents on the book for profit--which then
has to go into the pot to pay for our other bills--like rent, electricity
and so on. Since I'm not really up on what those expenses are, I can't tell
you what we'd actually end up with out of the deal, but if it's not below
the line marked "cost-effective," it's darn close. :-)

All that's assuming the print run sells out quickly and is in sufficient
volume to make the costs work at that level. Which is a hard balance to
find--we've just finally got it figured on sourcebooks after nearly 4 years
of experimentation.

>Since some people will buy all 12, that
> seems reachable but Goff would know better than me.  He's seen their sales
> figures...
>

Actually only once or twice. They wisely don't trust me too close to money
or anything like that. ;-)

>> Plus, there is the added difficulty of
> >maintaining story line consistency...

>
> Not too hard there either, IMHO.  You just put in your guidelines that no
> freelancer can significantly alter major players.  IE, you can have the
cult
> of Lost Angels in your story but you can't kill Rev. Grimme.  Paramount
does
> it all the time with Star Trek fiction contests.

It actually _is_ a fairly difficult. I won't go into details, but I will
make the point with Star Trek, having actually written for LUG--and Steve
can confirm this, I'm sure. :-)

Paramount hasn't exerted as strict of control over their property as I (as a
brand manager) would over a game. Case in point, head out to B&N or
Waldenbooks and pick up one of the many "Nitpickers Guides" to the Star Trek
universe.

They're a hoot to read, finding all the loop holes and/or contradictions in
Trek episodes and movies, but when you're trying to piece together a
coherent history of oh, I don't know, say Bajor, you start finding all sorts
of glitches that don't make sense. At the time, they didn't seem that big,
but all of the sudden, you can't do Event H without explaining how Event G
makes sense now in light of Event B.

That's why it may seem we're so uptight about keeping the reins of the
setting firmly in hand. And doing so requires a lot more work than one might
first guess.

Right now we've got 21 128+ page sourcebooks, rulebooks and boxed sets, 16
published adventures, a miniatures game, a CCG, and a Diskwars game all
feeding into and from our setting. And that's just the Weird West; several
HOE books contain references to the setting as well.

Now, I'm not saying that we're perfect--probably a good number of you can
point to a place where we've contradicted at least one plot point or "fact."
But imagine what that would be like if someone wasn't taking the time to
check against previous material. :-)

Don't get me wrong, though. This is a great job and I love it, but, while
it's a _lot_ of fun, it's not as easy as I'd assumed it would be myself. ;-)

> I wouldn't even have a problem with one article an issue about another
game.
> It's what Dragon does.  It may have an article or two about something
else,
> but it's a D&D mag.

Actually Dragon _doesn't publish articles about other games. Heck, even
other WotC games are lucky to get into the magazine. Why? For the very
reasons I stated in an earlier email.

It's the not-incorrect assumption that even a stopped clock is right twice a
day. Their target audience is D&D players. If they put non-D&D stuff in the
mag, they may make them happy, they may not. They can't possibly publish
enough articles on another game system to draw gamers from that system to
the magazine consistently without significantly cutting their D&D content.

On top of that, the audience is factionalized between the veritable plethora
of other games out there, they can't cover _everyone's_ favorite non-D&D
game. Inevitably, by trying to cover non-D&D games, they are going to
alienate some of their target customers.

However, if they stick with D&D, they're meeting expectations. If you don't
want to read about D&D, odds are you aren't buying Dragon anyway. :-)

Wow...I wish I'd have followed Grypon's example and spoken more concisely.
Well, that's about all I have time to blather on about, so I'd best get to
work. :-)

John