|
Post by Mike M on Jul 16, 2010 9:42:35 GMT -5
Due respect (being that I don't know you) but unless you actually have any information regarding Tom's printing/storing costs, the actual sales numbers, how many people want the Black and White sets, or whether Tom cares or not, you can't say what makes sense and what doesn't. I can't speak to Tom's actual sales numbers. I know that he has indicated a great number of fans who were interested in the game at different conventions who loved sample color cards, loved the color box, loved the gameplay, and then decided not to buy when they found out that the game was in B&W. I don't know what Tom's actual printing/storing costs, but I have a good idea. My work with EC and the most recent POW set has me intimately aware of printing costs. I can tell you that selling 10-20 B&W sets is not cost effective at all. Printing costs (on a per set basis) go WAY up in small quantities. Even if you bump that up to 40, the numbers don't add up for FG. In addition to the printing/storage costs, there is also an added production cost- you have to do 2 different layouts since both sides of the card will be different between B&W and color. That costs additional money. I also think that people would be upset about paying the same amount for color or B&W, but that's probably the only way it MIGHT work (and even that might not do it). There's also other less tangible issues that it would raise (consumer confusion, etc) that I won't get into here. At the end of the day, B&W has cost FG more customers than an exclusive switch to color will. Again, I don't know all of the numbers exactly, but based on my own experience and talking with Tom at G-con, I'm confident that what I'm saying is pretty dead on. I am a traditionalist. I've been playing this game since Invasion II. I loved the game as-is. Now? I think that I love it more. Color was long overdue, and even though I was a bit skeptical at first, seeing the cards made me a believer. I think that everyone (or virtually everyone) else will too when they finally see the cards.
|
|
|
Post by Splattercat on Jul 16, 2010 10:36:37 GMT -5
Well Cat, I am going to have to go ahead and, disagree with you. While I agree that putting ones eggs in a single basket rarely makes good sense, on this single topic it sure does. When I look at the posts in this thread , and see that there were only a few people who were really upset at the coloring of them.When i see that some here were actually more upset that prices might go skyrocketing and some still were just concerned that it was a cheap pop for the game while Tom had his brain elsewhere.I have to think the community has spoken about this niche game. If I were Tom right now, I would be thinking that printing up any amount of B&W cards would be a real waste of resources. As far as having information regarding whether Tom cares or not, I do . After plenty of heated debate ,with the PDF option not only being brought up here but on Toms Facebook, Tom made posts himself on both . He wouldn't even mention it. Some said he would talk about it at Gcon, but it seems that that didn't happen. So I think that him caring or not has been pretty much summed up. The way I see it, the only people that it might be an issue with are a few old schoolers here, and they/we have let Tom know about our grievances. Now that it looks to be 99% sure that B&W is done , you know what is going to happen? Every one of them are still going to buy the game. If someone comes on here and said "Because of color I am not going to be playing CotG anymore" I don't think I would even believe them. And the kicker, Tom knows this. 100% conjecture. It's nice to have an optimistic opinion and positive attitude. But the way you see it doesn't mean that's how it is. That's the advantage of a realistic opinion and a neutralattitude (because I know there are people here that will take what I'm saying as negative). This thread doesn't represent the entire consumer base. As I said, you don't have those numbers so you can't say either way. I presented an option, an avenue possibly unconsidered, nothing more. Whether or not you think Tom will/can/should do it isn't your call. I agree that he has to go to colour, but I don't think he should just dump those who like the Black and Whites without actually finding out if it's worthwhile considering. Only Tom has those numbers and only Tom will or will not take it into consideration.
|
|
|
Post by Splattercat on Jul 16, 2010 10:57:43 GMT -5
I can't speak to Tom's actual sales numbers. I don't know what Tom's actual printing/storing costs I also think that people would be upset about paying the same amount for color or B&W, but that's probably the only way it MIGHT work (and even that might not do it). There's also other less tangible issues that it would raise (consumer confusion, etc) that I won't get into here. I've already stated the "consumer confusion". Promote exclusively in colour. The Black and whites would be a sidenote, if that. The point is to make them available to those who want them. If not enough people want them then don't, but if enough people do, and these are the numbers nobody has, then why wouldn't he..? As for the relative costs of the cards, why wouldn't you pay less for less quality..? At the end of the day, B&W has cost FG more customers than an exclusive switch to color will. Again, I don't know all of the numbers exactly, but based on my own experience and talking with Tom at G-con, I'm confident that what I'm saying is pretty dead on. And without knowing how many Black and White sets he could sell, it's not. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Anyway, I can see how this conversation is going to eventually degrade (there are those who will take what I'm saying as some sort of attack against colour) so I'm going to forward my thoughts to Tom directly. If he considers it, great, if not, I don't care anyway. It's an idea. Nothing more. I've said what I came to say, so with that purpose fulfilled I'll make my exit.
|
|
|
Post by Red Headed Stepchild on Jul 16, 2010 11:31:59 GMT -5
I can't speak to Tom's actual sales numbers. I've already stated the "consumer confusion". Promote exclusively in colour. The Black and whites would be a sidenote, if that. The point is to make them available to those who want them. If not enough people want them then don't, but if enough people do, and these are the numbers nobody has, then why wouldn't he..? As for the relative costs of the cards, why wouldn't you pay less for less quality..? At the end of the day, B&W has cost FG more customers than an exclusive switch to color will. Again, I don't know all of the numbers exactly, but based on my own experience and talking with Tom at G-con, I'm confident that what I'm saying is pretty dead on. And without knowing how many Black and White sets he could sell, it's not. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Anyway, I can see how this conversation is going to eventually degrade (there are those who will take what I'm saying as some sort of attack against colour) so I'm going to forward my thoughts to Tom directly. If he considers it, great, if not, I don't care anyway. It's an idea. Nothing more. I've said what I came to say, so with that purpose fulfilled I'll make my exit. Hey, don't start if you can't finish. I was up for a bit of a debate, but forget it if you can't take a little heat.I don't know why you thought so but I don't think anyone was about to get ugly over it again. Your first post you said "Just going to throw out a business option for Tom that he may not have considered yet." and that you have read all the posts here. You also said something about realistic opinions. Now I don't think that after reading this thread it is realistic to think that Tom, seeing this all, hasn't thought all of this through to that end.Now that Mike has come in here and gave us a little insight, and he wasn't the only one, I don't think it is all just conjecture. It's not like this is a publicly traded company. Seriously, what do you want, a prospectus? " Tom I would really like to see the books on the numbers " If you really read the whole thread (and some of the facebook would be good too) you would see that the horse was already beaten and now you have moved on to pounding sand.
|
|
|
Post by Mike M on Jul 16, 2010 12:09:40 GMT -5
As for the relative costs of the cards, why wouldn't you pay less for less quality..? I thought that I covered this, but if it wasn't clear, there is a simple answer: Printing less copies = higher per set cost for printing. At the numbers that we're talking, it would not be cost effective to use a printing press without raising prices. It's a simple economy of scale, and if you've ever done any type of printing work (which I have) then you'll understand why this is the case. Ultimately, I don't think people will want to pay more for B&W, which leads to a problem, since printing cost will necessarily go up since Tom will be only printing a small quantity. Tom is running a business, which means he won't produce the sets if he can't turn an acceptable profit margin. Therefore, I don't see how this can work out in the way that you're suggesting.
|
|
|
Post by doublea on Jul 16, 2010 12:11:33 GMT -5
As a paying customer, you have every right to voice any concerns, etc to Tom about the game albeit respectful and courteous.
I was thinking of things, creative wise, that I didn't care about involving the game
1) the Alpha Stone storyline where it was basically nothing. That kinda defeated the purpose of Chaos' 2092 card
2) Bloodline was Star Warrior's son. I think it was one of those things like, whoops, if you really look at it in years, Bloodline probably wouldn't be Omega's son...and it was switched to Star warrior
3) Gustovich and Bendis' drawings. Ugh, but at least it didn't effect the back of the cards.
4) The whole 2118 edition (Vallah vs Maramus) was basically a waste since the fabric of the dimensions were breaking down due to the traveling between dimensions...yet was basically forgotten.
Truthfully, that's about the only four creative moves I can think of in all of the editions Tom's put out along with 21 years of playing. Pretty good ratio if you ask me.
The only thing, down the road for those who do still like the black and white, would be the .pdf file.
But its probably beating a dead horse for those who do like the black and white. Probably ain't gonna happen.
(Message to Tom - just pleaseeeee don't go to a photo on the Legends game cards!!!). I think that's the only influence (well, maybe something else) that would keep me from purchasing anymore Legends.
|
|
|
Post by Red Headed Stepchild on Jul 16, 2010 12:46:47 GMT -5
(Message to Tom - just pleaseeeee don't go to a photo on the Legends game cards!!!). I think that's the only influence (well, maybe something else) that would keep me from purchasing anymore Legends. Was this something that came out of his mouth as a possibility?
|
|
|
Post by doublea on Jul 16, 2010 13:04:03 GMT -5
(Message to Tom - just pleaseeeee don't go to a photo on the Legends game cards!!!). I think that's the only influence (well, maybe something else) that would keep me from purchasing anymore Legends. Was this something that came out of his mouth as a possibility? oh no no. I was just saying I hope he doesnt. I've never heard that discussed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2010 13:07:55 GMT -5
Was this something that came out of his mouth as a possibility? oh no no. I was just saying I hope he doesnt. I've never heard that discussed If Legends were to go "color" I would hope it's the actual art getting colorized and not the actual photos from LegendsOnline.
|
|
|
Post by doublea on Jul 16, 2010 13:10:43 GMT -5
oh no no. I was just saying I hope he doesnt. I've never heard that discussed If Legends were to go "color" I would hope it's the actual art getting colorized and not the actual photos from LegendsOnline. agreed
|
|