Re: [DL] Re: Combined Format [Heivilin]

[Ross Coburn <coburn@sympatico.ca>]

on 9/26/00 10:32 AM, Heivilin, Jim at banzai@missouri.edu wrote:

> While it's true that everyone has been very civil (which I applaud), and
> it's true that everyone has been criticizing, it's not quite true that it's
> been constructive.  I haven't seen but a few other proposals.  So it's good
> that you (we?) are telling PEG what we think, we haven't been offering any
> other suggestions.
> 
> And it seems that the suggestion "keep doing it the way you are" isn't very
> helpful.  Otherwise they wouldn't have come up with this idea in the first
> place. 

Well, try this one on.  I for one am not sure there's been a whole lot of
'whingeing' going on here (as you suggested in an earlier post), but then
I'm not sure how you feel about people expressing grave misgivings about a
pet project or theory.  If I were running a company (which thankfully I'm
not), I'd pay pretty close attention to my customers.  At the same time, I'd
do my level best to make sure that what I was hearing from a forum like this
was representative of my target market as a whole before taking it as
gospel.

So, without further adieu...  My masterful and entirely correct solution for
revolutionizing PEG's sales:

1. Forget the combined format.  Since I'm writing this little treatise, and
I have absolutely ZERO interest in HOE or Lost Colony, I get to arbitrarily
say that it'll hurt sales waaay more than it will consolidate costs or cross
market the lines to players not already involved in (game X, Y or Z).

2. Dramatically improve the quality of the editing and layout.  I love
Deadlands, but this stuff is pretty amateurish.  A spell-checker does not
replace a copy editor; the books are fairly easy to read, but are laid out
(in terms of type size/spacing/kerning etc.) in such a manner as tires the
eye quickly.  The cover art has been discussed to death lately, but it seems
fairly universally-held that the interior art has degraded mightily.

(Note: I have done all of the above professionally, save only acting as an
art director.)

If you're expecting your gaming audience to pay prices that are among the
highest in the industry for your product, make it worth their dime.

3. Identify what your audience wants, and provide it.  I suspect that the
combined format was an internal decision; having been presented to the list,
it has met with stiff resistance.  Maybe (just maybe) it wasn't such a hot
idea after all.  (Maybe it's brilliant, and we list members are the only
slugs who refuse to get with the program.)

No one screamed at GenCon?  Who were the audience made up of?  Hard-core
Deadlands/HOE/etc. players?  Casual gamers who wandered by?  CCG fanatics
who recognise the logo?  How many people were there?

If putting out too many books (however many that is) is such a strain on
production and resources, then perhaps ratcheting back production is a good
idea; quality over quantity.  What sells better; well-crafted goods that can
benefit from people browsing them in-store, and/or word of mouth sales, or
shoddy crap released frequently?  Which is better for the company in the
long run?

4. (Hardest item to follow through on here)  Expand production
resources/market share.  Deadlands is a great game, but it is pretty near to
being a closely-held secret.  Most gamers I've spoken to (I can account for
maybe a couple hundred acquaintances, and perhaps a thousand or more on-line
whose email addresses I might recognise) have NO idea what Deadlands is,
which kind of precludes them buying product.

If there is no money, then obvously highly-visible, Superbowl ad spots are
right out.  <g>  But there are other ways to get the message across; that'd
be another message entirely, but one I'd be pleased to write if people are
interested.  (I do know *something* about web and electronic marketing,
unfortunately, having worked for all kinds of content or branding firms in
other capacities.)

5. Price point.  Assuming an improved level of quality (which might make it
easier for the average fan to pay the higher prices), it might make sense to
release quarterly (or yearly, or bi-monthly, or whatever works) 'premium'
products, the more ambitious works that gamers might be willing to shell out
an extra $5 or so.  I've never had much of a limit on my gaming budget, so I
may be biased here, but I'd cheerfully pay more for a product that is worth
the money.  The skinny on Mina Devlin and Black River?  $40 (Canadian).
Great Weird North?  $30 (Canadian).  Book with a third or more devoted to
other games? -33% at least, if I buy it at all.  Cheaply-produced magazine
with little of relevance to me (I am NOT pointing at the Epitaph here, I've
never bought one)?  $6 if it's Dragon-sized, $4 otherwise.


A final note though, Jim:  People expressing concern over a percieved error
in a favourite company/product/sports team/laundromat's plans are not
whining, and is not being negative.  As a whole (which we list members do
not comprise in and of ourselves, mind) PEG's customers drive the ship;
simple as that.  Got a freaky-great idea, but no one wants to buy it?  Then
it's a rotten idea, from a business standpoint.

I don't know what resources Shane, John and company have to measure feedback
from non-internet, non-list members of their market, but they'd be foolish
to ignore any segment of same; here you get nearly instant feedback, and can
even question people further in the event of ambiguity or policy change.

Since PEG is apparently going to be determining their production schedule
for the next year soon, this is an ideal time for people to speak up.

After all, PEG doesn't do US a favour by listening, they're doing THEMSELVES
one.



Ross Coburn
coburn@sympatico.ca