Back to the 80's Personal Manifesto

[Jimmy_C]

[quote:7304033e32]I actually don't mind that 80's is a cult game for a cult following.[/quote:7304033e32]

Pillpop...don't drink the Koolaid...that's good advice.

[bjs73]

Doesn't anyone ever ponder just [i:f94ffa6296]why[/i:f94ffa6296] it took TSN so long to roll out the infamous [b:f94ffa6296]5 Pack 80's Deal[/b:f94ffa6296] to us? (Another bone.) I have.

The way I remember it is that it took a lot of b****ing and complaining on the main topic board and here until TSN finally relented and gave it to us.

Before the 5 pack deal, we paid 25 bucks a team. Period. Meanwhile, 2005 and ATG2 enjoyed their deals. Hmm... If you wanted to give Strat-O a go for the first time and you were just a plain Joe consumer with no bias towards any of the formats, which would you logically choose?

Personally, if I was that guy, I'd have chosen the one with the current players and oh- lookie there - buy 4 and get one free! Then after the hook, I might be inclined to take a chance on ATG2 with its own 5 pack deal.

In my opinion, the failure to execute deals and discounts across all the formats equally is a slow sign that they wish this format would just die. It isn't until the b****ing starts that anything is ever done. "Throw those guys a bone. We don't want to look bad."

On the other side of the coin, if they didn't want this format to die, they'd market and even price the game exactly the same as [b:f94ffa6296]Fantasim[/b:f94ffa6296] but they clearly do not do this.

Heck, if TSN isn't going to improve the game then why not just price the damn thing at $12.50 a pop all the time? Those guys aren't messing with the engine anyways. It's being run on autopilot anyhow.

Wouldn't you try BTT80's at $12.50 a team? I think most Joe consumers would.

Naw, it'd be better to keep it at 25 bucks and try to steer the market to the other formats. That's what I see as happening.

[yak1407]

Listen!!!
Hear that?
That's right not a sound, and that's the sound of TSN/Strat/Bernie responding to anything in this thread.

[YountFan]

Bjs,

1. Is the game fun in its current configuration? If yes, then be cool with that. ATG I was a a better game than ATG II, lets not riun a good thing.

2. Is your uni-bomber ranting justified for a tweek in the look and feel of the web pages?

3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!. After I wrote "Hey Hey Bernie", I was afraid that if they made changes they would ruin the game. There is a great balance in this game that could be upset by a flood of new players. We really don't need more. Having 'rare' players, some one like Yount, at a position makes it fun when your can get them. We don't need 12 SS with a 1 rating and stuff like that.

As I said before MINOR changes like variable salery cap and better stats. Don't be jelious of the the attention the other games are getting. We are better off with no changes than things that could ruin the game. We are like the secret underground rock band. The best in the land and our little secret. Those that play 3 80's season tend to stay because it is the best game on the planet. Lets keep it that way.

[roofinghorse]

it will never happen. sykes' mild changes are whats needed...AND i understant your frustration about(TSN,s) no new changes bjs.but the bottom line is we love this game and probably won,t go nowhere until something comparative (in addiction and fun) comes along...

i fell in love with this game the minute i started playing it and i probably wont go nowhere for a while.....hell,look at my record so far.i,m terrible but i,m a studier of the cards and i am improving.

So let them hear us with these few changes in mind and i too would like to hear from bernie on a definitive course of action AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

GOOD POST BJS....

[bjs73]

[quote:48c034cc8f]You've helped me out with the Disco Infernos during my 1st. venture "back" to the 80's.[/quote:48c034cc8f]

Thanks and your welcome. I'll help anyone who asks. I'm not the only one either. Everyone here lends a hand.

[quote:48c034cc8f]I have to admit that when the 2006 cards come out, I'm gonna play. I'm already committed to a few leagues with my regular online buddies. I'll also try and jump in to a TSN Autodraft league (w/ some Newbies) in order to win a credit or 2...[/quote:48c034cc8f]

And you should too. It's something you enjoy.

[quote:48c034cc8f]I will play the 80's game much more in the future though. It's a BLAST![/quote:48c034cc8f]

Excellent. That's looking at it from a new set of eyes.

I still experience the thrill of a good draft, the thrill of that hidden gem, the disappointment of George Brett's bad card. I'm certainly not ranting because I don't like the 80's, it's probably because I like it too much.

[bjs73]

[quote:f7d5159747]1. Is the game fun in its current configuration? If yes, then be cool with that. ATG I was a a better game than ATG II, lets not riun a good thing.[/quote:f7d5159747]

Believe me, I don't want to ruin the game.

[quote:f7d5159747]2. Is your uni-bomber ranting justified for a tweek in the look and feel of the web pages?[/quote:f7d5159747]

:lol: Hmm. Or do I sound more Howard Beale from the 1976 movie [url=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/]Network?[/url] No, I ain't going to kill myself on live televion but like Howard Beale says, "I'm mad as Hell! And I'm not going to take it anymore!"

A new web interface with the 2005/ATG2 features is right on target. If you take a look at the 2006 spoilers, some of those features would be nice also. Being able to sort by "handedness" would be cool. It's a start.

[quote:f7d5159747]There is a great balance in this game that could be upset by a flood of new (baseball) players.[/quote:f7d5159747]

I agree the balance is nice. No, I don't want a huge influx of new player cards either.

[quote:f7d5159747]As I said before MINOR changes like variable salery cap and better stats.[/quote:f7d5159747]

Quite right. Why don't we [b:f7d5159747]already[/b:f7d5159747] have this kind of stuff? As far as I'm concerned it's all past due. Yes, that's the kind of stuff I'm mostly ranting about. None of it changes the scope of the game.

But I also don't want to forget that there are some salaries in this game that definitely need to be fixed. TSN wouldn't have to dig deep in our own archives to find them either.

[quote:f7d5159747]We are like the secret underground rock band. The best in the land and our little secret. Those that play 3 80's season tend to stay because it is the best game on the planet. Lets keep it that way.[/quote:f7d5159747]

:lol: I don't think all of us can fit in your garage? I'll make sure to bring my harmonica though.

[bjs73]

[quote:b0134f34a4]Heck, if TSN isn't going to improve the game then why not just price the damn thing at $12.50 a pop all the time? Those guys aren't messing with the engine anyways. It's being run on autopilot anyhow.[/quote:b0134f34a4]

I wrote that earlier today but I thought of something this afternoon and wanted to touch on why I think they won't pull the plug nor will they ever lower the price either.

I was a plant manager of a small manufacturing shop (75 employees) a few years back. We made RV entrance doors. I'm going to make an analogy from that experience.

Our highest volume customers got the most attention, the best pricing, the shortest lead times, and the best delivery. As they should. My first week on the job, after reviewing the financial statements, I noticed that a lot of our units broke even and some were even sold at a loss. By and large though the most margin we made on anything sold to the highest volume customers was 5%. On my first P and L statement we took a loss despite the volume sold. I asked my boss about that and he said, "they're the ones that pay our electric bill. No big deal..."

I equate this to the 200X [u:b0134f34a4]new season games.[/u:b0134f34a4] That's the highest volume and that's what people buy. I understand that it's a new product every year and the bulk of the resources need to be put there to churn that product out. I can accept that fact on a business level.

Our lowest volume customers by and large had the opposite customer service. Minimum lead time of 4 weeks or they had to pay a surcharge. The delivery was not nearly as good. And we paid as little attention to them as possible. And yet, when I reviewed the P and L statement on those guys, we made killer margins of 35% or better!

Was their product any different than the higher volume guys. Nope, in fact, it was actually easier and cheaper to produce. We rarely had quality issues or warranty issues with the lower volume guys either. Making product for them was a piece of cake. I asked my boss about that disparity and he said, "that's where your bonus is coming from this year."

And so that's the story of the margins. The most energy was spent pleasing the guys that paid the electric but I got to enjoy a handsome Christmas bonus off the backs of the little guys. All of that company's profit margin was off the lower volume stuff. That company wouldn't be profitable without the little guys either.

We treated the lower volume guys like crap, well, because we could. We were their cheapest local supplier. My boss would say, "I know they're a good customer but they're stuck between a rock and a hard place. They're not going anywhere because they can't."

Sure, every once in a while, one of the little guys would pitch a fit because of a late delivery or something. What was the solution? "Go ahead, BJ, and throw them a bone."

Doesn't anyone else think that this sounds similar the way I do? Of course, I can't prove it. (Unless TSN wants to show me their income statement. :lol: ) There's just far too many similarities there for my liking.

How long did it take to get the 5 pack deal in the 80's game again? Why wasn't it initially offered as it was in the other games? Why don't they just cut the price or pull the plug on the 80's game due to "lower volume sales?" Well, I think it's mostly because our profit margin is larger than the others even though the player pool is much, much smaller.

Rationalize that with the Fantasim format now: the lowest volume of them all. They pay $14.99 per season. Huh? That format involves all kinds of transactions and probably requires the same type of maintenance as the other formats if not more. Why can they offer that so low?

[b:b0134f34a4]Because it's a marketing tool used as a crossover to the simulation market. They're trying to draw in the fantasy crowd and cross sell them a simulation product.[/b:b0134f34a4] If they get in at a cheap price and enjoy it, maybe they'll try 200X also. And so on and so on.

And so it goes, the 80's game wouldn't even be here without the new 200X season games going strong but I'm sure that there's a decent profit margin coming in from 80's game. It requires very little maintenance and it has a core group of very loyal followers. "They're not going anywhere because they [i:b0134f34a4]can't or won't."[/i:b0134f34a4]

1969 might make it as long as it can maintain a loyal following. The development and the burn in time is done. All that has to be done to maintain it is to make sure people keep buying the product.

If anything is going to be pulled it will all start with 2001. It has had its run and the volume will eventually get to a point where it isn't worth all the server space. Be prepared to see that announcement in the next year or two.

[seanreflex]

BJ,

I got up this morning and read your post, and said to myself, "oh shit, either BJ has been drinking heavily again, or it's time for his wife to get dressed up in that HOT flannel shirt and her sexiest tube sox for a little nookie for BJ ....

that said, I'll give my two cents, for EXACTLY what it is worth (2 cents):

I like ... no, I LOVE this game. It probably would help me in my job and my marriage if they phased it out; because I KNOW I wouldn't spend time in the other games. I've tried 2005, 1969 and ATG II, and it does NOTHING for me. So, I don't want it phased out.

I don't have any huge problems with the game the way it is. Would it be nice to have better stats, better splits, manager name in expanded standings? Yes. Is it a critical decision maker in my playing or not playing? No way.

I would love to see another 12-15 players added to the deck --- we've had posts on who those players are. Seaver, Bench, etc. come to mind; but it also makes this game awesome to know you've only got 5 shorstops that can play D, the other 7 teams need to dig, scrape, and find ways to win (kinda like my beloved Sox did in the 80's with men like Hoffman, Owen, Rivera, et al).

We definitely are an "underground" subculture here. You and Sykes and a few others clearly have more time than I do to analyze, compare and study the game format compared to other Strat formats. I like the community. The 30 or so steady managers that I play against here are like friends to me. I truly enjoy the comaradarie and ribbing that we all share. To have a theme dedicated to the Marine Corps, or 2000+ wins, is great stuff.

Should TSN make some changes? Probably. Should they make the pricing equivalent to other formats? Probably --- but who are we to say. Does it COST them more to operate the 80's with the mystery format? We don't know their cost structure, do we? I'm not saying it does, I"m just saying, in my business I have tons of customers who don't have a clue what my cost structure is to provide the service they constantly bitch about, yet can't live without.

I respect you tremendously, I think you know that. I consider you a friend, and I'm not against you on this. I simply think that Bernie et al at Strat/TSN have been forthright with us through problems, and I respect that.

My final point, I respect you for speaking your mind. Becuase you are correct --- in some regards it is like the right to vote. One man ABSOLUTELY makes a difference. Just imagine if you were a guy named Chad, living in Florida in relative obscurity. Then, BAM, a presidential election comes along and your famous for reasons you could never have dreamed :wink:

Continue your crusade, Mr. Beale (can I call you Howard??) :lol:

If you ever visit NH, take note of the motto on our license plates -- "Live Free or Die". That can be a double edged sword.

Sean

[IM Bacchus]

Kuddo's to you BJS for rekindling the dialogue on where "mystery card" Strat is going here on TSN. A bit over the top, but he sure has gotten everyone's attention. Lord knows this game needs and deserves a little attention.

After being an early sceptic, I have become one of this games most vocal advocates. Mystery Card Strat has been a quantum leap forward for Strat-O-Matic baseball. No other game offers the challenge and undiminished excitement of this game. NO GAME PERIOD!!

It continues to amaze me that TSN continues to butcher the marketing,promotion, and development of this game. Folks say the game has a cult following.... yeah, because TSN has done next to nothing to promote the game from the day they launched the format.

Back to the 80's does not require any kind of major overhaul, just tweeks. Personally, I would like to see the injury reveal eliminated from the game, but I know that opinion on this is split. I'd prefer to see new versions of the game developed for these boards.

In terms of revenue generation, mystery card games, along with ATG Strat, can be the largest PROFIT generators for TSN. Back to the 80's was launched a couple of years ago and it's development cost should be fully amortized fairly soon. Yet the game continues to draw new players long after single season games are long dead. I've played a couple of 1969 season's and I say here and now.... I'm pretty much over it. Single season Strat no longer offers as much of a challenge. Mystery Card Strat is simply a better game.

To summarize, thaks BJs and everyone else who has expressed an opinion here. I would like to see new decade versions of mystery card strat, and see TSN address the minor bugs in the Back to the 80's game.

Come on Bernie, what do you have to say.... We are all eyes and ears.

IM Bacchus