Last issue I filled in everyone on the reasons for our switch to direct mail. This time I'd like to elaborate a bit on how things have gone so far and to relieve some misconceptions of what we are doing (also to encourage grass-roots support).

Things have gone surprisingly well so far. We well exceeded our expectations. Our planning was based on being able to move about 1,000 of the new game in the first year of life. We met that figure in less than four weeks. Now, we are looking at selling most every copy of the game as we would have via distribution. We fully expected to match and beat the funds the distributors would have generated but figured on losing some unknown percentage of the unit volume they would have given. That appears to be a false assumption and all the better for us.

The really nice thing about all of this is the number of stores which have come forward understanding our position and willing to carry the games with a smaller margin just ot ensure a steady supply to their customers. This is very telling of the high degree of regard those retailers feel toward their regular customers. It also speaks volumes about those who might refuse to carry the games at all. Those who care versus those who do not.

A popularly held misconception is that we "won't sell to stores" or whomever. That is not correct. We will sell to anyone who saunters up to the table with money in hand. We cannot offer the kind of terms stores are used to, but if they can deal with the 30% we can give, then we will be happy to have them carry our stuff. If your favorite retailer is supportive of wargaming and you want him to carry the games, have him contact Sara and she'll outline the details to him. When the fellow behind the counter rolls his eyes at the thought of getting "only 30% and how he can't possibly make it on that, ask him how he thought we were supposed to make ends meet getting only 26% (39% payment less an average 13% COGS). 30% is a better deal than we were given for the last eight years--if 30% is such a bad deal, then what does that say about 26%?

That said, if you do have a high-quality game store, I encourage you to talk to him and have him call Sara. We will be happy to do business with him, but only on terms we can live with. The effort boils down to convincing them that something is indeed better than nothing. The quality retailers are providing a valuable service to the industry; one we would like to see continued--but not at the cost of our own stability.

For those most concerned about our reaching new players without the store presence, I must say that we have been most gratified by the results of our ad in World War II magazine. One ad had generated over 100 new customers in the same time period from all other sources combined. As mentioned above, the best game stores out there will still have the game on the shelves (the other stores didn't matter anyway in this issue). The net effect is that our base of customers in now growing faster than it was before.

In all, our decision lead us into all sorts of complicated cause-effect patterns, none of which simple black and white analysis can handle ("they aren't in the stores, so..."). At once the issue presents us with things which are both vastly different and hardly different at all. In time, we may determine that the shift had only one major effect--it radically improved our chances at long-term survival and opened the door for all other game companies to regain some sense of order over their own houses. I hope they can learn from our experiences.

In Brief (Ops 23)