The differences in their answers, both in length and content, provides an interesting look at these three companies.

Heh… that certainly is an understatement!

I agree, it is an understatement. I have always admired straight talking men, and have always been suspicious of folks who give long answers...without actually answering the question being asked.

Peace

I liked Jay’s right to the point, direct answers and laughed at Greenwood’s dancing around the topic to avoid answering.

I would be very interested in Fantasy Flight’s responses to these questions.

Agreed. Christian Peterson has been rather outspoken in the past about how he does not like Internet sales. They do nicely support their retailers with promos.

The problem is, it is now a 35-45 minute drive to my “local” brick and mortar store, and I make it there perhaps every 6-12 months. If games went b&m only, I would have to stop buying them.

But...there are a couple of fairly close “gaming halls” that cater to the collectible crowd.

The scary thing is that this behavior is now creating two different hobby game markets. I’m pretty sure that the hobby game market isn’t healthy enough to divide, although we are definitely the smaller part.

Frank, even if the discounts on the internet were eliminated, the game sales would not be “brick&mortar only”. Sure, you couldn’t pick them up for 30-40% under MSRP, but you could still get them for straight-up MSRP, or maybe 10% off depending on the particular MAP policy adopted.

Also, if they were going to go b&m only, that would not be affected by Leegin. After all, WizKids was already not allowing sales to the online channel, and through a distributor.

Limiting boardgames to b&m sales WILL have earth-shattering consequences IMO.  I for one buy 90% of games online because of the discounts, and so do most of my gaming buds.

Robert, none of these companies are talking about limiting boardgame sales to b&m only. Well, WizKids already does, but what Leegin allows is eliminating the typical 30-40% discounts you see on many online stores. It wouldn’t lead to only being able to purchase games in b&m stores.

It’s true that you’d be paying more, so perhaps you personally would buy fewer games, if your gaming purchases are currently limited by the amount of money you choose to/are able to spend on it. However, if it leads to more stores carrying such games, and thus more availability, it could lead to higher overall sales for a game maker. I’m sure that WizKids considered pretty carefully before deciding to eliminate online sales entirely, which is a much more drastic move - I suspect that several other companies will decide to take advantage of Leegin and reduce the available discounts online to help their games be more widely available in b&m stores.

I have to say I have absolutely no idea what all this is about. How can a publisher complain that a company is selling their product too cheaply? They are getting paid the same price to send boxes out the door. From a business point of view, who cares where they go, who buys them, and for how much?

The argument that the current system hurts B&M’s is like the argument NOT to close an army base because it will hurt the local economy. If your business model only works because of some liberal laws propping you up, then maybe you need to re-think things.

And yes, I am a Libertarian.

Ok, so limiting sales to B&M’s is the extreme (ie will never happen, and I was thus, exaggerating), but limiting online discounts would put a strain on board game sales in general, IMHO.  CCG’s and wizkid mini’s are generally cheaper than what the MSRP is on some of these boardgames, and have a wider audience. 

I would have never had a ~100-boardgame collection if I had had to pay for them at MSRP (or a tiny bit below this).  I generally paid 30% less (no, I don’t want to do the math to see how much I’ve saved...it’s hard to calculate without adding up how much I’ve PAID).

Give me status quo! Viva capitalism!

Jim, as a Libertarian, shouldn’t you be fine with people creating and signing whatever contracts they feel like? After all, it’s their property. Heck, I can’t think of a good libertarian argument for anti-trust laws at all.

The sad reality is that not many brick and mortar stores offer me much more than higher prices and surley service.  I have encountered notable exceptions during my time in the hobby.  I have always been faithful about sending these exceptions my business even when in purely economic terms it might not make sense.  However, the “comic store guy” from the Simpsons is not entirely a caricature of what we encounter in the sterotypical comic/card/game shop.

That has pushed me further and further into online purchasing.  If I encounter bad service there, I can quickly move to another retailer.  I am not forced to from deal with the same jackass who is the only “game in town.”

I also agree with Robert.  If I was paying full retail for all my games, it would make my wife happy.  My collection would probably be cut in half.  So, from a manufacturer’s point of view, they should understand that I make a lot of marginal purchases thanks to online retailing, that I would otherwise ignore. 

Jason

"Jim, as a Libertarian, shouldn’t you be fine with people creating and signing whatever contracts they feel like?”

Maybe I didn’t udnerstand the legal change. I thought it was about a law NOT ALLOWING retailers to sell below some price. If I publisher wants to set a price and require those who sell their games to abide by it, I have no problem with that at all. However, if the retailer is willing to pay the same wholesale prie as everyone else, then I would frown on a publisher making such requirements.

I buy lots of games because I can get them cheaply online. If I the prices are no longer cheap then I will stop buying lots of games. It is that simple.

I will most likely buy very, very few games if I had to pay full or only a limited discount. I would especially stay away from companies that I find are setting limits on discounts.

It’s a reinterpretation of an anti-trust ruling (Sherman) that prevented such contracts.

Jim Cote wrote: “If [a] publisher wants to set a price and require those who sell their games to abide by it, I have no problem with that at all. However, if the retailer is willing to pay the same wholesale price as everyone else, then I would frown on a publisher making such requirements.”

I’m confused, Jim. You’re saying that you have no problem with this situation at the same time that you’re frowning at it.

As I understand it, some retailers want to set pricing floors for their products to retain a perceived value on those products. Apple has been doing this years; wherever you shop, you find iPods and MacBooks at the same price. (I’m not clear how Apple did this if vertical price fixing was previously illegal.)

Some game publishers are unhappy with deep discounting online because some gamers come to view games as being worth only this discounted rate. “This is a $20 game,” they say, referring to a title that actually retails for $30.

These publishers typically view B&M stores as entry points for new gamers, claiming that no one becomes a gamer through purchases at an online discounter. Only people who are already gamers shop online—and this leads to a smaller base of sales for B&M retailers, who go out of business, which means fewer non-gamers are exposed to these games.

This leads into your other questions: “From a business point of view, who cares where they go, who buys them, and for how much?” If you take a long range point of view, it matters a lot where they go, who buys them and for how much. I managed a comic store in the years shortly before the industry crash in the early 1990s, and those years were insane, with publishers pumping out multiple covers of the same comic and customers buying them up like crazy.

The problem, though, was that each customer was buying multiple copies; those sales weren’t bringing in new readers. Many comic store owners (including my boss) focused on these hot sellers at the expense of a broader range of titles that would bring in more readers. We sold out of Hate #1 the first night it arrived, and he said, “Good, we’re done with that book. No way are we reordering because then we’ll get stuck with them.” When Todd McFarlane’s Spiderman #1 came out, he said, “We’re going to sit on 100 of these to make a killing down the road"—despite the multiple copies sold to nearly every buyer who was thinking exactly the same thing. When those readers—excuse me, speculators stopped purchasing multiple copies of guaranteed hot, collectible books, hundreds of comic stores went out of business because they had sunk thousands of dollars in comics that would never sell.

Online discounters might aid publishers by encouraging “marginal purchases,” to use Jason Matthews’ term, and pad those publishers’ accounts in the short term, but in the long term the availability of heavily discounted games through online retailers inhibits the growth of B&M stores and the growth of the industry itself as games won’t be discovered as easily by a wider audience.

Someone in my local game group opened a retail store in Dec. 2005, and although several of us purchased games through him, others in the group bought through online retailers because they saved money. They were more concerned with saving $10 or $20 than they were with supporting a friend by doing business with him, a friend who hosted game nights in the community and introduced new people to adult strategy games. Some game publishers are thinking along the same lines, but on a nationwide scale: B&M sales enlarge the industry; online sales move product.

This Supreme Court decision isn’t about liberal laws propping up a business; it’s about a business having more say in the financial decisions that will affect the public’s view of its products and the long term development of its industry. The business can set certain terms under which its products will be sold, and if a retailer doesn’t agree with those terms, then that retailer is free to not sign the contract and not carry the products.

I’m not suggesting that gamers should expect a wave of changes in the immediate future. Publishers’ viewpoints on this issue are all over the map, and they know that some gamers are very sensitive about paying a penny more than they think they should.

"I’m confused, Jim. You’re saying that you have no problem with this situation at the same time that you’re frowning at it.”

It’s just like Wallace/Bohrer thing. John has the right to protect his copyright (if it’s his), but all it does is piss off a lot of people. I don’t deny him the right, but I will not give him my money. It’s just like standing up for the free speech of someone who is saying something you disagree with.

About B&M’s. Should they live at the expense of the consumer? If the publishers think it’s in their interest to support B&M’s by setting a minimum price, then they will. But it will cost them a lot of business. And in the end, the B&M’s may die anyways.

About “This is a $20 game.” MSRP is meaningless. There’s wholesale and retail. If I can get a game for $25--meaning someone is willing to sell it to me for that price--then it’s a $25 game. The fact that a B&M wants $60 for it doesn’t make it a $60 game. Not only is it cheaper online, but I also get better support. The last B&M I was in didn’t have any game I was looking for, and never heard of BGG.

Eric,

For a long time I shared your concern about Bricks and Mortar Game Stores.  But, I have ceased to worry.  Why?  Well, first off, I don’t think most B&M shops actually make good entry points to the hobby.  Most (again, not all) game stores are not the sort of places you want to send a newbie into to get a flavor for the hobby.  They tend to be dark, dingy places in dying strip malls.  The help is either uninformed, or downright dismissive.  Most have limited venues for playing, and tend to be dominated by insiders that aren’t really doing much to recruit new folks into the hobby.

Related to that point, how many “full blown” game stores are there anyway.  Most game stores are comic/card/game stores.  The emphasis, driven by commerce, is almost always on comics and cards.  So yes, new entrants to the hobby can come into a store and handle a game.  But they need to be drawn to that store in the first place.  I dare say that people drawn to comic/card/game stores are the people we are going to get into the hobby one way or the other. 

In a way, I think relying on B&M stores to perpetuate boardgaming was part of the hobby’s mistake in the late 80’s.  Now, if I am a game company in the collectible market, I might have a different view of this.  Maybe I need the game shop for the whole genre to work.  I don’t know, but a company like Wizards—a subsidary of America’s largest toy and game producer—might have a lot of things to consider.  They are a company that sells product to Walmart and every other major retailer.  So, I found their evasive response predictable.  This is a complicated question for Wizards. 

I am pretty sure of this, the resurgence of boardgaming is not thanks to B&M stores.  A whole lot of them cropped up during the CCG craze, a whole lot of them sank when that bubble burst.  The best ones—the ones with good customer service, good stock, playing space—will survive because they provide a real service.  I doubt that the others will be able to compete with the internet.  In that sense, its like the small book seller.  You’ve gotta have the game I am looking for the moment I want it.  Otherwise, I go online in the first place.  The best mom and pop bookstores survive because they know their customers.  The others are going/have gone under.

Jason

I agree with Eric, in that, if you have a good game store in your area that is enthusiastic about helping customers and hosting game nights to introduce more people to the hobby and bring gamers together--support it!  A great B&M store brought me into the hobby (see my Postcards From Berlin next month) and another great one is drawing in new gamers by the dozens (see this month’s Postcard).

Unfortunately, I agree with Jason in that most B&M stores I’ve eagerly visited in the U.S. have fallen short in atmosphere (yes, dark and stinky), customer service, and organized events (outside of CCG tournaments).

From what I’ve observed from afar, the best chance the U.S. has for expanding the hobby is the local game club, which orders online for its expansive library and for its members, and enthusiastically reaches out to its community for new members.  Game stores in the U.S. that offer this seem to be few and far between.

The difference in responses may largely be a result of the difference in markets for their various products.

Collectible games may very well rely on B&M stores for their continued health. Tournaments, leagues, etc. are common draws that entice new players. They also extend the life of each game as new expansions are released. Would there be as big a customer base for Magic if there were not tournaments and leagues held at B&M locations? Probably not.

Boardgames are a different kettle of fish. Are sales of Race for the Galaxy going to be driven by a series of RftG tournaments or leagues? I highly doubt it. Are most boardgame sales going to be driven by in-store demos and organized play? Probably not.

Another significant difference is that boardgames don’t have the limited shelf life of the collectible games and don’t rely on planned obsolescence. A copy of Reiner Knizia’s Samurai from 1998 will play perfectly well now and years from now. MtG cards from that same year are long obsolete. For most people, there is no rat race to get into with boardgames as there is with collectible games. If someone is introduced to boardgames and they like them, most likely they will buy a handful of games and play them repeatedly. There just isn’t the kind of treadmill to get on for most people.

I think all this is unnecessary fuss, because it isn’t an anti-trust law, and only benefits a few niche markets, of which boardgames are not a part of.

For one thing, price restrictions that are too high will screw over everyone, B&M included, because then no one can have sales---or clearances for that matter.  And leftover inventory that can’t be moved hurts every retailer, online or not.  Imbalanced price restrictions would prejudice every retailer against you.

Plus, this is capitalism.  People tend to like to rip each other in the belly when possible.  Price restriction opens up a publisher to just that; even if someone is just 5% below you, they will still capture more market (assuming quality etc is same).

So even if there is a price restriction decided upon, I can’t publishers actually sticking with it for long.  At most it would be cost of materials involved in making the game.

Why the heck worry and bicker?  Why assume the sky is crashing down?  It’s silly.  If one believes so much in happy capitalism, vote with your wallet and don’t worry.  I don’t believe in entirely happy capitalism, and I don’t worry.

I know this is Board Game News, but there is no way to remove boardgames from the hobby in general and call them a seperate entity.

Regardless of what people think, B&M is essential to the hobby and needed by companies to grow the hobby.

Too many comments here come from gamers already familiar with the hobby and their personal introduction to it. However, how many gamers got interested when passing by a curious looking shop? I know… few are run well and some are even off-putting. But there are people that join the hobby by browsing.

Every game can grow if there are B&M shops promoting it. Online does nothing to grow the hobby.

Calling B&M dinosaurs or complaining that they are mostly comics stores anyways means that you don’t understand the hobby or you don’t understand the business models forced upon them by the competition.

What this ruling means, if many companies take to the pricing structure, is more B&M stores and hobby growth.

Online stores won’t run a M:TG tournament. They will never host a Warhammer 40k event. Probably will never tell someone how to play Puerto Rico. And they will never host an RPG session.

These things, provided by many B&Ms, will always help the sales of games. The sooner the companies recognize this, the better it is for the hobby’s health.

And if you have to travel a distance to a B&M, perhaps this new ruling will put a store nearer to you… or you could order online still.

It will not affect my purchases because I only buy games I want to play… regardless of the cost.

I say if a CEO can’t answer 4 questions with a least 1 straight answer, that CEO should be fired. Or just say he will never do interviews again and save people the time of reading driveling politician-speak.

CCGs, CMGs, comics and anime are not boardgames. To say that boardgames need the same marketing strategy as the others is erroneous.

If Internet discounters are the death of the boardgame hobby, why are there more publishers and more hobby games being published than ever?

To say that “Online does nothing to grow the hobby” is hogwash. Online retailers allow hobby games to be sold where there are no B&M stores. They have a selection that no B&M store can match, giving exposure to good games that would never be able to crack a B&M-only industry.

Most B&M stores will teach just as many people how to play Puerto Rico as will an online store. Teaching boardgames is very labor intensive and costly. How many sales would be generated from demoing Puerto Rico to 20 people at the same time? At the minimum you will need to crack open 4 copies of the game. Then the labor needed to explain the game to 4 tables would have to be factored in. It’s just a bigger bang for the buck to have a publisher-sponsored CCG event, where the outlay in time and labor is far easier to recoup in immediate and ongoing sales.

Hobby boardgames are a prime example of word-of-mouth being the best advertising medium. I would hazard to guess that far more people are introduced to hobby boardgaming through friends than just happen to be walking by a game/comic/card store and get hooked by a complete stranger.

Jeff:  “From what I’ve observed from afar, the best chance the U.S. has for expanding the hobby is the local game club, which orders online for its expansive library and for its members, and enthusiastically reaches out to its community for new members.”

Ding, ding, ding!  We have a winner!  At least, this matches my own thoughts, so the idea must be good!  :-)

My experience with our own group certainly falls in line with this.  Lately, we’ve brought in quite a few new people, with various levels of exposure to gaming.  Many have been bitten hard by the gaming bug and have added to their own personal libraries.  And much of the appeal here is the low price and convenience afforded by online stores.  In essence, WE, the established gamers, are serving as the teachers and the online stores are providing the product.  We benefit by getting new blood into the group and the new members get a great new hobby.  This is the same role traditionally ceded to B&M stores, but here it’s friendlier and more direct.  I have absolutely no reason to believe this is an isolated case.

I also think the points Paul S. is making in his two posts are very good and relevant ones.

William Baldwin: “...These things, provided by many B&Ms, will always help the sales of games....”

I don’t know what kind of super-Walmart-style B&M’s you have where you are, but the ones I’ve been in keep their boardgames in the back of the store, on a dusty shelf. And you have to walk past the kids playing Magic as they point and laugh. There’s nothing inviting about it. I don’t see how they help boardgaming in any way. In fact, I would say they hurt it.

Wow, I find myself agreeing with Jeff, Paul and most disturbingly, LARRY.  I need to stop reading this thread.

Come on, folks. Stop claiming that minimum advertised price schemes (MAP) would cause online sales to totally vanish. Boardgames would not suddenly become “B&M only” just because online sites can’t immensely discount them. Heck, those sites margins would increase too, and while I’m sure the shift would result in some of them dying, not all of them would collapse. You will still be able to buy games online.

Ava, I don’t think you understand what a MAP clause is. You give the example of not being able to have clearance sales, but that’s simply not true under modern MAP clauses. Rather, what it does is require the retailer to not *typically* discount more than a certain amount. Sales, clearances, and so forth are still allowed. The intention is simply to push up the minimum price a product is generally available for, and it is structured accordingly.

The largest B&M store here in Calgary is bright, clean, friendly, has a ton of selection and charges straight up MSRP. There is a HUGE mezzanine for open gaming one floor up that runs around the main shopping area.

On many weekends it can be standing room only on that mezzanine. Folks playing all kinds of games, Roleplaying games, Miniature games, CC games, and yes even boardgames.

I personally know the owner and he actively supports many of the local game conventions and gaming events. I am on of the organizers for FallCon (http://www.fallcon.com), shameless plug I know, and he is the largest supporter of us, by quite a margin.

The benefits of having this store in Calgary for the last 25 years or so don’t stop there! Tons of smaller game stores have spawned all over Calgary because of the vibrant game community largely started by the first store.

Does all of this sound great? I can attest personally that it is great to have such a thriving gaming community here in Calgary. You want it folks? Ya gotta support it, bottom line.

There is a dark shadow now though, the deep discounters have hit this stores bottom line. Many of the folks on his mezzanine buy their games online and bring them to his store to play. The store knows this, and is watching his bottom line being eroded away, and now the owner is pondering closing the doors. This makes me sad.

Folks want boardgames to become a mainstream hobby? Then support stores like this one. It really is that simple.

Some of the threads whining about the price of boardgames MSRP remind me of a story a girlfriend once told me. She was a waitress at a popular restaurant. One day a crowd of about 25 college kids came in and ordered loads of beer, pizza, wings, and desserts. She spent a ton of time serving these folks and when they left said to her..."Sorry we can’t leave you a tip, we are all college students and are watching our money! We know you understand.” She busted her butt serving them and had to clean up the huge mess they left. She was recently a student herself and was watching her money as well. No, she did not understand.

Folks want it all. In my personal opinion most folks reading these lists can afford to pay MSRP for games. Those few who are on a limited budget, well, just like those college kids, how about ordering one less pitcher of beer and leaving a tip?

You want a vibrant healthy local game community, you have to support it. Bottom business line.

Peace

I think Michael is right that the use of MAP clauses would not mean the death of the online retailers. What surprises me is the assumption that use of MAP clauses would result in a dramatic boost for B&M retailers. Even if online retailers and B&M stores charged the same price, I, at least, would still do most of my shopping online. I would buy fewer games, because, as others have mentioned, my games purchases tend to be at the margin, but I would get them online.

I think in discussions like this, people tend to get so focused on the relative prices that they lose sight of the other significant values that online retailers provide to their customers. The assumption seems to be that online merchants provide low prices and B&M stores provide everything else. I don’t believe that’s true. Online vendors are not just cheap retailers without a face. They have a number of advantages beyond price:

1. Online retailers are universally accessible. Anyone with an internet connection can browse their products at will. That seems obvious, but I think it is important to acknowledge. By contrast, B&M stores can only serve people who happen to be within a reasonable geographic distance from them. The closest B&M gamestore to me, for example, (other than one comic shop with a couple shelves of dusty games in the back) is 120 miles away. That is a significant difference in accessibility. I can visit an online retailer (and half a dozen competitors) multiple time in a day, but to go to a B&M store even once takes a considerable investment of time (to say nothing of gas). Which segues nicely into a closely related advantage:

2.  Online retailers are dramatically more efficient with time. An online retailer is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. That’s significant. In my case, for example, my shopping often happens after my wife and daughter are in bed. Shopping at an online retailer can also be done in bits and pieces, a few minutes at a time. I can log on during lunch, look at a few games, maybe put one or two in my shopping cart, then come back that night after thinking about it to tweak my order. I can, essentially, amortize the time cost of shopping over the space of a day, a week, or even more as necessary. With a B&M, by the time I’ve made arrangements for child care and spent half a day in the car, I have to be able to find and get what I want or wait weeks or months until I can schedule a big enough block of time to visit again. The whole process uses significantly more time and yet, ironically, the experience is much more rushed since I don’t have the leisure or flexibility I have online. Time is an enormously valuable commodity and using it efficiently is a significant value added.

3. Online retailers have a vastly larger support community. Proponents of B&M stores often tout the advantages of having someone in a store to make personal recommendations. Others have already pointed out that such knowledgeable and helpful staff are somewhat less than ubiquitous in the actual B&M landscape, so I won’t belabor the point. Instead, consider what almost every online retailer offers: a link directly to BGG from any game you happen to be looking at. With a click of a mouse, you have access to reviews, session reports, support materials, and more. Even the most knowledgeable B&M clerk can’t offer the insight that you can get from reading a variety of different opinions about a game. Apart from the BGG link, many online retailers offer customer reviews and ratings. Many also offer tips and suggestions from their own staff—tips and suggestions that are as competent as those of the employees of a B&M store but that will still be available long after the staff person has gone home or even left the company.

4. Online retailers often offer other conveniences not available at B&M stores. Many have wish list features that can be private or public. Most will let you fill a virtual shopping cart and let you leave it or tweak it for days. Some offer recommendations based on prior buying history.

5. Online retailers deliver the products to your door. This is another obvious point, but it shouldn’t be glossed over. Not only is it more efficient to do the actual browsing and research online, it is much more efficient to have someone else do all the schlepping. The time saved by not having to sit in traffic (even if the stores were not so far away), hunt for parking, and then deal with traffic on the way back can be substantial. I don’t have a lot of free time, and I would much rather spend it playing games than driving around hunting for them.

My point is not to put down B&M stores but to point out that there are very real non-monetary values that online retailers offer their customers. Most boil down to various ways of using time more efficiently, but that is not insignificant. Time is a critically valuable resource. Online retailers offer a number of ways for their customers to make better use of their time than they can at a B&M store. I think the value of that efficiency often gets lost in discussions that focus on low price v. physical presence.

David

And yet, Brent, here in the DC area we DO have a vibrant healthy local game community, with nothing like the very nice store you describe.

I’m simply saying that the old paradigm may have changed.

Thanks for clearing up the MAP clause, Michael.  I did indeed not understand.

And I’m still not worried.  ^.^

I do find the discussion about game communities recentering around the local game group interesting---and probably the way the wind is blowing, regardless of anything else.

The flustering panic, not so interesting....

Michael: “Ava, I don’t think you understand what a MAP clause is. “

My impression is that we’re not talking about Minimum Advertised Price clauses here - those are already being used in the retail world.  Unless I’m mistaken, this decision allows publishers to mandate not minimum advertised prices, but minimum SALE prices.  As in “yes, Mr. Retailer, you’ve purchased the game from us, it’s now your property, but you’re not allowed to sell it for less than $X or we will sue you.”

I’m one of the people whom Eric has called out in his message above.  I did purchase some games from our mutual friend - when I needed a game on short notice, or when the price was relatively comparable to what I’d have paid online (including shipping).  When I was making a large purchase that qualified me for free shipping, though, I generally made the purchase online.

William: “Regardless of what people think, B&M is essential to the hobby and needed by companies to grow the hobby.”

I don’t know about this, William.  I think we’d all agree that B&M stores are suffering in today’s market.  Is the boardgaming hobby suffering along with them?  As Paul said, it seems to me that the hobby is thriving.  More and more people are being introduced to gaming all the time.  I agree with Paul and Jeff in saying that I’d guess most people who come into the board gaming hobby are introduced by friends.  Personally, I’ve always been a gamer.  After growing up playing Monopoly, Uno, etc., I discovered Eurogaming in an online article about Settlers of Catan about a decade or so ago.

My point?  I don’t know.  I like hometown game stores as much as the next guy.  I guess I’ve been lucky in my experiences with them - the ones I’ve visited have, in general, been bright and happy places, staffed by friendly and knowledgeable people.  I’m not against supporting them...if you feel that a business of any type is providing a service that you find valuable, to the tune of paying a premium of about 35% on all of your purchases, then it’s your right/responsibility to support that business.  Personally, I prefer being able to view a huge selection of games all in one place, instantly link out to a wealth of information on any game I’m considering, (all without leaving my desk) and have the games delivered directly to my door.  Saving 35% off the cost of games is definitely a plus, but I’d still probably choose to buy online more often than not.

As to the pricing issue, there’s just something that makes me feel squeemish about allowing one person/company to dictate to another person/company what price they can sell an item for.  If I can make a living charging a particular price for products, shouldn’t I be allowed to? 

In the end, though, I believe that market forces will win out.  If I’m a game publisher, and I see that my competitors are artificially inflating the consumer prices of their products, while making no more money than I am in relation to wholesale prices, I’d think it would make sense for me not to follow suit.  If customers log into Thoughthammer and find that all of my competitors games are selling for MSRP, and all of mine are selling for 35% off MSRP, one would think that that would have some effect on sales.

The bottom line is that, if the board game industry is relying on the old B&M stores to be the cornerstone of their industry, perhaps they need to rethink their model. 

-Dave

Wow.... I was away for a few days and look at all I missed.  It’ll be a while before I catch up. 

Isn’t this hobby great?

Jim, the economic argument that this case is based on actually comes from George Stigler, one of the leading free market economists from The Chicago School.  I studied with him and personally heard him advocating it 20 years ago.

My understanding of the argument is that allowing manufacturers to control the retail price enables manufacturers to compete more effectively with each other by allowing them to compete on terms other than price.

We currently have a fairly healthy network which allows us to learn about new board games. However, imagine Rio Grande coming in to compete with Parker Brothers. They know that, on the shelves of Toys R Us, anyone is naturally going to choose Monopoly over Notre Dame. In order to compete with Parker, they focus on selling in to hobby stores, where they spend some time with store owners explaining how to sell Eurogames, and even encourage them to run game demos. The FLGS owner needs a high markup to make this worthwhile. But Rio Grande also wants to benefit from the distribution of Toys R Us. The problem is that once they sell
into TRU, the mass marketer cuts the price, and steals the business from the FLGS. The FLGS isn’t selling any copies because people instead buy from TRU. Ultimately, Notre Dame doesn’t sell many copies because the FLGS won’t carry it (too labor intensive) and people going into TRU instead choose Monopoly. Thus, Monopoly continues to live up to its name.

In the gaming world, this example is not so critical because we have things like BGG to provide us with information we need to make a purchase. However, the representative from WizKids sees his market differently.  He feels that B&M retailers do provide an essential service in introducing new players to his product - showing them off, conducting play sessions, and teaching. He can only expect this if the retailer has strong profit margins. This strategy needs to be able to support a minimum retail price in order to compete with the manufacturers who sell to mass merchants.

I personally see this happen with high end audio equipment. There is a group of manufacturers who sell into an entirely different set of retailers than do the Sonys of the world, because their product needs extensive demos, recommendations and return policies. They do everything they can to support dealer margins and it is generally difficult to get a meaningful discount on these products.

I don’t think that publishers like RGG will benefit from controlling retail prices precisely because internet forums do more of the selling than B&M owners. However, I can see this affecting Funagain, for example, with their exclusive products like Incan Gold, 24/7, and (eventually) Through the Ages. Currently, they choose not to sell to internet competitors because they know that this will create price pressure. However, if they can control the retail price, they will have some more incentive to sell more broadly.

Jonathan: Nice post. Where’s the “thumbs up” button? :)

I’ve been watching this MAP like an eagle. As an owner of two FLGSs, price is the one part I can’t compete with. A clean store with a helpful staff is where I do.

My basic arguement has always just been “Pay where you play.” If you don’t ever go into a FLGS or find that your FLGS isn’t F and you only buy online and game in your basement, fine. Like 99% of BGG’ers, buy online and wonder why you can’t find a gaming group to get into or an opponent other than your small group of friends. However, if you have a FLGS that is doing everything it can to promote gaming, consider picking things up there and consider the price difference as orginization dues.

Though, a part of me hopes this goes in. Price is the one aspect I can’t compete with OGSs in the same way that they can’t compete with the “touch and feel” aspect that I can offer. I’ve basically written off most BGG’ers as potential customers. As gamers that buy a lot of games, most of them use the price to get quantity of games. Overall, I think this is one of the problems hurting gaming as mainstream in the US. (I consider the other to be the XMas seasonal stores that have some register jockey that can’t explain how Carcassonne plays because she has never heard of it before and she just sells what they stock.) Basement gaming is rarely a growing group, getting fresh blood in is near impossible. Conventions don’t bring in much new blood. This is the service that good FLGSs (and currently XBox Live) offer.

I totally agree with John on the thrust of his point.  I do think there is something fundamentally wrong with gamers taking advantage of a shop and not contributing to its success.  I have heard tales from one well-respected member of the hobby, who also ran a retail store, of folks coming in to play every week, and never spending a dime in the store. 

As I mentioned much earlier in the thread, I very consciously avoid that.  Even when I am just trolling in a game store, I am likely to buy SOMETHING to be supportive. 

But, while John probably runs an excellent shop that I would support, I do not find that in the mainstream.  And as others have mentioned, there does not seem to be a strong empirical connection between the number of game shops and growth in the hobby.  The hobby seems to be growing organically through sort of peer-to-peer social networks.

In that sense, the internet has also provided an enormous organizational tool for a low density hobby.  Whereas all of the basement groups that John references would have been anonymous in days past, now they have websites.  Those websites help players link with one and other.  Then, you have tools like the Geek, Meet-up and Google-Maps etc. etc.

So, the internet has eliminated one huge barrier—the OK, I am hooked, but wait there’s no one to play with—problem.  As far as I am concerned, the internet has totally saved wargaming.  Without the ability to find players, and tools like the wargameroom.com, vassel and cyberboard, wargaming might have gone belly up.  Now, I think it, like boardgaming in general, is on the uptick.

"Basement Gaming”?  I’m not sure what that means.  I’ve definitely had the same sort of experience that Jason has, though.  The gaming group that I was a part of in NH (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/6amGamers/) was formed entirely through connections made online.  Some friends who met on an outdoors website and discovered that they had a mutual love of games put feelers out on other websites and 6am gradually coalesced into the thriving group that it is today.  While there were some game days held at a member’s shop, and another member has hosted a couple events in his well-finished basement, the vast majority have been held in well-lit dining- and living-rooms across the state of NH.

It’s like I said before...if your local game store offers services that you make use of, and are valuable to you, then you should definitely support it.  I just disagree with the posts here that seem to be saying that, as gamers, it’s our obligation to prop up the B&M game shops because the hobby won’t survive without them.

Anybody here pick up gaming because of FLGS? 

There weren’t any where (rural Indiana) and when (60’2s and 70’s) I grew up. My family played cards, but friends got me into AH titles.  We had to mail-order any “weird” (non-Parker Brokthers) games mail-order.

I’ve introduced several gamers to the hobby of boardgaming, many of whom purchase games now, from non-gaming and from roleplaying backgrounds.  I’ve never found a store a good place to do that.  By the time someone stops in a game store, they are probably already interested in games.  General hobby stores might be an exception, but I still think personal “recruiting” is the most effective method.

When many of us got started, there weren’t FLGS. I only saw games in hobby and craft stores. In one case, it was a bunch of AH and International Team games next to the String Art.

The ONLY person I know of who got into boardgames because of an FLGS was already there buying RPG stuff.

The meetup.com group has done a much better job at bringing new people in, as restaurants are much more appealing places than practically any game store I’ve been into. The Mercer group has at least netted a few new folks as well.

To pick up on Dave and Frank’s points, there are some interesting observations there.  First, as to Dave’s point about “basement gaming,” I think he is right.  Eurogaming is out of the basement.  That’s one of its highpoints.  Its a social hobby that can meet at Barnes and Noble and attract newbies.  Unlike its role playing and wargaming brethern, it is not relegated to a dank basements away from the condeming eyes of polite society.  To coin a phrase, there is no shame in these games.

Secondarily, as Frank noted, I do think game stores do help with cross-over gamers.  People who played magic or who might have been roleplayers who check out boardgames and move over.  I do not think this is necessarily a vital role, but it does happen.  Were it not for a game store, I doubt I would have ever crossed the other way to CCGs or Games Workshop games.

Finally, one thing I find interesting in this debate is the distinction made between “BGG-style, mass consuming purchasers” and the same type of person in comic books.  It might just be my imagination, but I find B&M stores rarely give much of a discount to mass gaming purchasers.  However, comic stores do it routinely for folks who buy comics in large quantities.  To some extent, these are even the same stores.

I wonder if game stores could not work out a similar arrangement to bring some of the online business back into stores?  I think the BGG types are becoming accustomed to spending $150 a pop to get free shipping.  Couldn’t game stores offer a meaningful discount to people ordering $150 worth of games at a time?  Can’t they work deals with their best customers who buy in volume, just like the comic stores?  I realize the distribution systems may come in to play here, but is it really axiomatic that those of us who buy games in bulk are lost to conventional retail outlets?

Jason