Crowdfunding & Retail Pledges - A Complicated Ecosystem

[@Phlanx06]

Theres a component to this discussion that wasn't brought up... As a publisher we can tell retailers what the MSRP for our game is but since we give them a discount often because they have additional expenses and they wouldn't be able to sell the game without a discount and they buy larger quantities. But the retailer can charge whatever price they want to sell your game at. We can make policies to tell retailers we wont sell to them anymore if they do this but often retailers wont follow this even when they know it exists and theres not anyway to prevent them from discounting your game which in turn may make previous crowdfunding backers upset that the price is lower in retail. So its also a risk to sell in retail of getting bad PR

[@Revanthil]

As a consumer, it's actually quite simple to me. If I'm interested in a game, and it goes crowdfunding, I check if there are any exclusives / stretch goals that won't be later available in retail. If the answer is yes, I back the game. Otherwise, I simply wait for the retail version. In this way, even if I pay for the game and shipping more on crowdfunding than it costs later in retail, I still have the exclusive content which makes my copy more valuable and I'm not mad. Maybe I'm too cold and deliberate, but backing a game simply to support the creator and without any real monetary incentive is naive in my book and doesn't really happen much.

[@rmiller6975]

I'm the same I only back if there are exclusives I want or if the game is not going to be available retail. Generally games end up being less expensive after you include shipping in retail than on crowdfunding. Plus you get to wait until it has some decent in-depth reviews.(edit: Note to self - watch whole video before commenting.)

[@BoardGameCo]

I don't disagree with this approach at all

[@aos-archive]

Sometimes there is no guarantee of you knowing in advance if a retailer will have access to the exclusives... hence the FOMO factor is huge for many.

[@rmiller6975]

I usually operate under the assumption exclusives will not make retail or have limited quantities.

[@steeveman]

Alex, another great video! Love your professional view on crowd funding and board gaming in general! These videos are greatly appreciated and dare I say necessary. Keep up the great work.

[@BoardGameCo]

Thank you Steve 🙂 I appreciate it

[@chazelliott3416]

An excellent and spot on assessment of the current status of the boardgame space for crowdfunding - Mandatory viewing before anyone considers CF a game.

[@orbesteanu4tsa]

Good job, Alex! More on these conversations perfect for coffee❤

[@Spidoink]

Just hearing you describe the situation in first few minutes makes me laugh. This is just the board game cut in a nutshell. you have chickens with their heads cut off running in circles.

[@BoardGameCo]

It's definitely a little much

[@phinori]

Changes/reinforcing European VAT laws has added a nice little hurdle to this. If you try to effectively give a small discount to backers based on US total price, it means your game in crowdfunding will most likely be significantly cheaper at retail in EU compared to effective crowdfunding price (item+shipping+VAT). If you try to price things so that EU backers actually get anything out of the crowdfunding effort, you are leaving a lot of money from US backers on the table. There are ways to balance this but these days not many succeed at it. Even CTG games that have little retail presence are occasionally cheaper at retail in their own store compared to EU total price during crowdfunding effort.

[@BoardGameCo]

Yep, international and pricing accordingly is another challenge for sure.

[@eriklindqvist9923]

Very true. We have VAT but most products in retail also have regional pricing making things not that more expensive than in for example US even when including VAT. Otherwise things would not sell in retail due to being too expensive. Working with video games this is very apparent when you look behind the curtain on steam prices for example. We basically give games away in some regions. And this is in no way reflected in crowdfunding so things get way more expensive for regions with VAT not just due to paying VAT but having a higher than normal base price that the VAT is calculated on. I've passed on many crowdfundings even with exclusives due to this when the price simply don't make sense on the local market.

[@JeremyJohnsonmcmxcAD]

River Valley Glassworks did this. Was on sale cheaper than the campaign at Target before backers even got the game.

[@ELEnzaneEFeX]

Just was watching the Mythwind review section of your last video before work, then got to work at the airport and saw you walking through carrying a mic. Didn’t want to bother you, but it was one of those cool, “Whoa!” moments.

[@BoardGameCo]

Wait...are you at PDX now?

[@ELEnzaneEFeX]

@@BoardGameCo Seeing this 8 hours later, but I was. I work at the airport, but had to get to work anyway and make sure my staff were doing their jobs. A missed opportunity.

[@redknight808]

Great discussion. Thank you. I've been backing a lot of CMON's stuff and their recent shipping of Cthulhu: Death May Die S3-4 to cons, retailers, *some* backers, while leaving the rest of us gameless for additional months feels wrong to me. In fact, I'm going to try getting all the exclusives from Game Stewards (avoiding shipping costs) and the retail stuff from an online store (again, avoiding shipping prices). I'm not 100% sure about saving money (factoring in free shipping), but I know I'll be getting it sooner next time. It feels really crappy to jump through those hoops rather than CMON doing right by their backers. It feels like they are incentivising this behavior.

[@MrScrawnjuan]

If they can afford to give Retailers a discount on copies, doesn't that mean they're charging other backers more than it's worth. IMO they should get a lesser version for a lesser price.

[@henrikwakman7776]

Nemesis Kickstarter was great, but retail did not feel dressed down. CMON retail games, for me, feel somewhat lacking. They're created to be unappealing compared to the retail version. Nemesis adds extra content over an already complete package, CMON's added content often completes an otherwise slightly or sorely lacking experience.

[@thecuriousboardgamer]

The only time I've felt shafted by this scenario was Feed the Kraken. Gamenerdz presale was less than the KS price (by a good 15% or so) for the same product and roughly same release.

[@adukovski]

I understand the altruistic point of helping the creator with financial security to make his game and fulfill his dream. In recent time, this past two years, retail is cheaper then crowdfunding. So if I am giving the creator an interest free loan to make his game and get his profit and his compensation, what's in it for me...what is my reward? If I help the creator fulfill his dream why am I punished paying more than a person that didn't gave the creator interest free loan. Publishers and creators should reconsider what they are giving the backers back. And backers should demand more of the publishers for their money. We are at the point where people are backing on ks/GF just for sake of it, and publishers are using that and misusing it.

[@TabletopFamily]

It's simple. Quality exclusives for a free loan from backers. It's the best solution with the smallest demographic of complainers vs the amount of people that will back for exclusives. Some exclusives are getting lazy though and it's made me more cautious in general.

[@patrickvandenberk9192]

I think there is an error in thinking in this video, that probably is carried by a wider audience (most people probably). It is true that if a game is cheaper on crowdfunding then in stores, people l (or one of the layers between the producer and consumers) can perceive the game as overpriced. BUT we tend to forget that crowdfunding platforms are not RETAIL platforms but INVESTOR platforms. There is a risk there, that should be rewarded. So by those standards, it is really not unreasonable that investors have a financial benefit. That’s how it works in any other area of business. But because people see crowdfunding platforms as a store, this worth gets lost in translation.

[@Corax695]

Hi Alex, I like your take and I have an additional question. Usually there is more than just one person creating the game. I'd like to know how the USD 20 is split between the creator/designer of the game and the artist. Does the artist get any fix amount for the amount of work + some porcentage from each game created? I guess this is very individual but what would be the usual model?

[@robertcrist6059]

It helps to slow down and think about where all the money is going/making the game I (we) want to buy cost $xx. But the bottom line is if I can buy the same game for $x or I can buy it for $y ($20 cheaper) why wouldn't I (anyone) do that? Saving money only means you can then use that money in another way, like buying another game (we all have problems). It means little to me that I support a flgs, a big chain, or the publisher directly. Each can be thankful for me choosing to purchse the game from them, but they don't care that I spent $20 more to do so. I don't get a discount toward my next purchase. I don't get a thank you card. Nothing benefits me from spending more, so why do it.

[@robertcrist6059]

It's funny to me people get upset their crowfunded game is available in retail before they get their copy. Who decided we get the game first? Unless the publisher on the page says so specifically, it's all random and then based on location. Silly thing to get hung up on. Unless you have the game in your hands nobody else can who didn't back the campaign; but the second it's in your hand, a non backer can now hold/own it? Shouldn't a non backer have to wait as long as you did by comparison; well they did actually, the difference is you knew it was happening and the random person who sees it on the store shelf and thinks this looks cool I'll buy it, wasn't aware of the game until that moment but had to wait until the game was on the shelf to then buy it. Last night silly thoughts.

[@ElKobold]

Great video!

[@BoardGameCo]

Thanks 🙂

[@bocaccio5]

Alex, I always enjoy hearing your perspective on topics like this. You are very transparent about the complexity of the issues and the viewpoints of the various constituencies. I was actually going to send you an email about a related issue. Put succinctly, for people who back a game, what is (or should be) the expected value/price point at the time that it ships? Setting aside the topic of scalpers, if someone backed a game at say $150, should there be some expectation that if they sold the game immediately upon arrival, they would be able to get $150? This leads me to the real question I wanted to ask. To what extent should one expect the price point hold over the course of fulfillment, particularly if you are one of the last people to receive the game, say a month or two after fulfillment started (within a given country)?

[@BoardGameCo]

These are very hard questions to answer, and honestly kind of come down to your own personal expectations. My own personal expectation is that if you want me to give you money a year and a half in advance, there should be a reason I did so. And that reason ultimately comes down to, can I get that thing from any alternate source for less money, or even the same. If so, why should I back now? Why not wait?

[@adukovski]

Absolutely correct. Unfortunately a lot of companies take backers for granted. And on the other side there are a lot of backers that back everything without even doing their own calculations. ​@@BoardGameCo

[@robertcrist6059]

Curious if there could be a system for publishers to offer the cheapest price for a game if bought directly from them, and factor the price based on wait time. When you purchase a game you can buy it for a, b, c, or d price and each price means your game will be shipped once all other orders are met and you are in line. I buy the game at the a tier, maximum value and therefore my game jumps to the front of the list and is mailed out in 2-3 days or whatever. Alex, is fine with waiting and is savvy and buys the game at the c tier saving $15 (?) but it won't get shipped to him until all a's and b's are shipped, and it will continue to get pushed back if more a's and b's are purchased. Plenty of finer points to tease out, but I would be open to buying directly from a publisher and waiting for a game if it came with a discount.

[@robertcrist6059]

One of the aspects of this idea I could see being critical is the information from the publisher regarding how many a, b, c, and d orders are currently in the hopper, how long each take to process and ship, and how quickly that information is updated.

[@anacousins9829]

I had try kickstarts and I got mad you pay and you do not see any game for one year if you are lucky. Never again😢

[@BoardGameCo]

It can definitely be frustrating

[@jasonc2784]

I typically wait for reviews and a second printing. Can't trust the paid promotional videos during the campaign and what if the game is a dud? There are plenty of excellent games available now. If there isnt a second printing and I'm still interested, then the second hand market in a couple years can often suffice.

[@TheTintinjb]

Say Multiverse and CDMD timelines

[@BoardGameCo]

What do you mean?

[@TheTintinjb]

@@BoardGameCo I meant that many people are still waiting for the pledges when is available at retail and other backers got games weeks/months ago in the same country

[@BoardGameCo]

@TheTintinjb ah gotcha

[@the-puzz1e]

I’ve got to say that consumers are often irrational, but this is especially true for board game fans. Whoever feels better purely because someone else paid a few dollars more than they did for a product is oddly irrational. Some people seemingly have the entitlement and emotional control of toddlers

[@williamblack6912]

Crowdfunding is really a funny place...the backer has all the risks, while the creator has all the benefits.

[@BoardGameCo]

I vehemently disagree with that. If you think the creators don't have any risks, ask yourself how many companies have shut down and people lost their jobs, vs what the backer stands to lose. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean that it's okay when any risk is put on the backer... But I certainly disagree with the idea that the creator has no risk.

[@williamblack6912]

The creator gets an interest free loan, has in the end when it boils down no obligation to deliver anything and as a backer you've no legal way to get a hold of them even the platforms themselves don't if they fail. Or where is the Update where Mythic shows where the money from Hel and Anastyr went. Crowdfunding has devolved into a gloryfied pre-order system except for the occasional Indie game.

[@AmstradHero]

@@BoardGameCo Yes, but even when a company shuts down, what's lost is the ambition of the creators. Yes, some spend their own money in the hope of digging themselves out of a hole and fail, but the reality is that they received a lot of money from backers, which gave them the resources to create, benefit, and potentially give themselves (and some employees) a paycheck. The creators get a loan to enable them to do something that they want to do - if they fail primarily they've suffered a loss of ambition, time, and potential money. Backers have lost real money and received nothing for it. So while I don't necessarily agree that creators have zero risks, their risks are notably smaller than those of backers. We all saw what happened with Mythic. Or Blacklist Games. We all see what is happening with companies like Petersen Games. Or Lazy Squire Games. People who seem liable to never get what they paid for despite putting out hundreds of dollars individually, and millions collectively. And those creators received that money. Many backers receive, or stand to receive, little or nothing at all.

[@Mike_James]

this is all PR speak for consumers get shafted regularly, you just dont generally know about it. another example of this is MAP pricing. its all very anti consumer. it simply is. and yes, less products overall because of a more fair pricing ecosystem is actually better in this case. 5k board games are made every year is it? how many are worth our time? yet we still get shafted as consumers to have people put pretty bows on it in an attempt to convince us this is how its supposed to be. i backed the project in question. GN getting it so cheap they could offer an untold number of copies at a cheaper price point didnt bother me personally. that said, it does demonstrate how broken the system is. any attempt to pretend the system isnt broken only perpetuates it. i really dont have an issue with paying for the things i want. otherwise i wouldnt pay hundreds for a leisurely hobby multiple times a year that will ultimately see more shelf time than table time. that said, i am truly over being told how its ok that the entire ecosystem is anti consumer. honestly.

[@BoardGameCo]

I'm not sure what part is PR speak? I'm explaining how a sucky situation can occur. I'm pretty clear that the way it went down, means someone is getting screwed, just a question of who.