by PotKettleBlack » Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:05 pm
All the improvements to the game and all the price reductions will fail without some coherent and potentially aggressive marketing plan.
Scenario #1: Prices are lowered by 50%. Some vets up their play, and some existing players double down. It will NOT produce 2x game play without a trumpet to attract new customers.
Scenario #2: Bernie gets two underlings, one of whom built the game at Strat, or wherever it was built, and every suggestion on the suggestion list is banged out. Cost of this is probably 200K if they are full time staff, 150K if they are contract staff. Without price reduction, making up that cost will require many new customers, who will not appreciate fixes because they don't know the difference. Again, expanded marketing is key.
Scenario #3: Mixed. Price reduction + Fixes. Additional cost is, uh, 1 extra programmer, so 75K in contract staff, or 100K in full time employee. Price is reduced by 25%. Some of the price people come back, some don't. Some current players up their play (I don't... time/interest are my constraints, not funding). Some retired players prove me right that it's really burn out, not economics. Will still require new customers to cover the cost of the additional help.
At some point, the game becomes about new customer acquisition. That's where the return on investment is. And that's where the Sporting News people are and probably the Strat people as well. It's not produced for the love of the game or the love of the current customers who probably do not produce funding at a sustainable level (if they did, no big meetings happen).
[img:0eba628ea0]http://www.2008tshirts.com/Assets/ProductImages/PS_0313_BENJAMINS.jpg[/img:0eba628ea0]
PS - The world's about marketing and ... NSFW Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71zxjU-SC3Q