On a side note, if the offending link was the one i think it was, last i knew the person was planning on selling them, and the site is most likely the one i am thinking of becuase of the Moria refrence. (the set is a something i am watching off and on becuase it is an interesting set that has a use for me.)

But even if it were free personally if WWG, or Mel, or one of the RC or Pepsi companies out there (i can think of two other active and one defunct competator of WWG), came out with similar products i as a consumer will get both the free and the paid, for the varity having the two sets from two different sources offers. There are limited numbers of images in the pdf (not saying there aren't lots) but there is a finate number of walls for houses etc and getting more is always a good thing. As well as for supporting a good company, and you tend to get what you pay for, the "Free" stuff in many cases can be good but with no driving force of profit behind the production you don't tend to see a lot being put out by the people... So i'll still stick with a proven provider to support.

There are only a few other active publishers i can think of and one in my opinion is not even close to being on par with WWG on the look and quality of sets i am interested in so it's a no go, (RC cola for me) WWG has them beat hands down for me, but i have to admit i look at other sets, But as long as WWG puts out things i like i will support them.

For what it is worth, there is an alternate way to deal with competitor's products. Rather than pretending they don't exist by banning discussion/linking/reference to them, you can always allow it in the confidence that you make a better product and that everyone will see that and stick with you. That is the attitude that Ed from TwoHourWargames takes on his forum. Every time somebody brings up another game system, it gets tossed around a little and then people decide that it isn't as good as Ed's game. You get the same result but without the heavy handedness and ill feelings.

The site with Moria Mines and now working on a desert set is that one I've referred to a few times elsewhere on the forum. I asked Denny if I could link to it, but since he is planning on selling the completed desert set, linking is not allowed.

Personally, I still look around the free sites out there, mainly for ideas. The quality is rarely near WWG, and when it does approach though levels, the complexity of the models are usually way beyond me. I'm specifically thinking of some of the Japanese sites I've visited.

Now that I'm sold on WWG, I'll get there version first, but if they do not have a certain product for sale (desert for example) then other companies products will fill the gap. I still use modern buildings from another place to flesh out my games when I need some variety... but I much prefer using the quality of the WWG sets when possible.

Arabin

This debate is always of interest to me, especially as a somewhat new moderator (I've had to ask questions about this very policy, and done some very serious thinking about it). And I see both sides of the argument, and both have their merits.


I think in this case, in this vertical market (which is very small, and only beginning to gain acceptance), with this product delivery type (digital, as opposed to print), and especially with the spectre of piracy constantly looming, Denny's policy makes sense.

The key is the newer, more casual customers, ones who aren't yet WWG converts. The pie is - currently - absolutely too small to be offering up free slices to those folks. Think about the unnamed Moria set, which looks a lot like Gothic Realms. Presented with the choice of buying GR, or downloading the free set, which do you think most new/casual customers will choose? I know what I would choose.

And if those customers download the free set, and it works okay for them, what incentive do they have to come back? Or worse, if the download it and DON'T like it, and decide cardstock terrain sucks, what then? That is a customer lost for good.

Could they find those links themselves? Sure. But they'd have to go looking for them, and thats the key. Part of what Denny pays for with his website/store design and his RPGNow presence is the marketing effect that comes with them. Why should Denny pay for that, then direct a prospective customer to another site, when he has them captive, now?

In my industry (my company refinances autos), there are two types of people: shoppers and captives. Shoppers are going to shop, no matter what. They'll search around, and find all the possibilities and weight them against each other. They don't mind spending an hour to find the most miniscule discount - half the game for them is getting the "best deal". Then there are the captives. They're the customers we found (ie, paid for), and they want to do as little work as possible. They don't know or care that there might be a better deal out there - they just want the deal done, and unless we barf the sale, they're going to use us.

To make the parallel to this market, the shoppers are the ones that are going to google all the paper terrain possibilities, download ALL the free ones, check all the pay ones, etc. I'm not worried about them. They do what they do. They might be looking for quality, they might be looking for quantity, or they might just be looking to fill their hard drive with free stuff.

But the captives ... the ones that come here first. They are critical to convert to sales. There is NO WAY you want to provide them with other alternatives, and possibly turn them into a shopper. Sure, you can mention other sites to them, but if they have to go look for them, if its effort, they're likely not to do it. And customes like that are important, they enjoy a comfort zone. If they have a good source for their desired product (in this case, terrain) and that source is meeting their needs, chances are they won't go anywhere else.

(On a side note - you know why a lot of sites/forums have that intermediary page when you click out? Its cleverly disguised as a legal thing, but its also just a deterrent from leaving - there is substantial evidence that the more clicks someone has to make to perform a task, the less likely they are to complete the task.)



Now, in a year or two or three, when this market is bigger, there is more product acceptance, delivery issues (like piracy) have been worked out and WWG is a bigger name and a clear industry leader, I think this would probably be a different story, and as a sort-of-inside person I would definitely think about rebroaching this topic with Denny. But in the current state, I see this as a fairly sane policy.



Wow. Sorry to write such a book on this.

I disagree.

When I was a Borders Books worker drone, I tried like hell to find the books my customers wanted, but if I couldn't, I checked the competition. If they had it, I told the customer. Happy customer was the desired result, because a happy customers will buy more from EVERYBODY.


Likewise with this policy, it is WRONG to stifle the discussion of others because you think it will keep customers with you. They come for product, if you don't have it, they may go elsewhere, or just not buy.


Your 'captive' buyers don't, by your own statement, care about other seller. Telling them Mel has his own line of models doesn't concern them in the least. Stifling the 'shoppers' is very likely to piss them off, burning up good will they might harbor towards WWG because of the quality of their model sets. Given these facts as you've described them, it seems to me the better approach is to acknowledge other sellers products, and let them decide.


Nuff said, I'm off to work on my dissertation instead.

My point of view is also a little 50% - I have "suffered" the cut of a link to a possible competitor also...but I understand it...The real think is knowing that you're playing with another one food and when he Say Stop...you stop...and usually Denny is not the all or nothing is quite comprensive...So I accept what they say (like it 100% or not)

Wow, a very heated topic The official policy (which has always been policy):

No linking to competitors products or websites. No linking to money making enterprises which are in related fields. Linking to free model sets is permissible as long as those items do not represent a direct conflict of interest with our current or planned product lineup (moderators discretion).

Feel free to share links to items of interest over the private messaging system. Feel free to talk about competitors products over the private messaging system. The above policy is standard fair on most "company" website forums I have visited and with good reason. This isn't about denying the existence of "the competition", it's an effort to maintain focus on our own brand rather than using the traffic we've worked so hard for to highlight the competition. At the end of the day I would just rather not get into the muddy water of discussing the competition (the good and the bad points). And to be perfectly clear, I have made efforts in the past to open the lines of communication with my competitors to maintain a stable and healthy market. Mel Ebbles and Hirst Arts are the only two businesses in related fields that have been "human" about things. Which is why I have no issues with those products being discussed here. My efforts to reach out to the major competitors in this field have been met with silence, arrogance, mud slinging and generally juvenile behaviour. Do they deserve free advertising on my forums? I think you know my answer.

Allrighty, so from the sounds of things, talking about said products is okay if done in general enough terms as to not identify the guilty (heheh). Works for me!