Hey all, I'd like to float anm idea which has been concerning me a little bit recently. I'd like to clarify that I'm not going to go into the unverified accusations against SCG, as those have been done to death. What I'd like to ask is why Wizards show such blatant favouritism to Star City Games (and, to a lesser extent, Channel Fireball).
What makes me say this? 2 big things:
1) Preview Cards. This is the biggie - previews generate huge traffic for sites, pulling in many more readers than regular articles and also conveniently marketing the cards. It strikes me as odd that Wizards would give previews to a sepcific store, effectively granting them free marketing. I would imagine that this hurts other stores without a way to generate such attention - and hence I cry favouritism.
2) Playmats. SCG's event playmats for their open get to use official Magic art (copyrighted etc etc etc), while not even every GP organiser is allowed to, and individuals at home are expressly forbidden from getting mats printed with their favourite pieces! So why does SCG get this special treatment, to again generate more footfall for their events and stores?
Sorry if this seems rambling, I just don't think Wizards should put such a priority on supporting a big business while LGSs suffer with every poor choice and policy change.
/growl
1: So you're suggesting that random local LGSs should be given preview cards that not as many people will get a chance to see instead of large market vendors with traffic in the millions per day? (Ignoring internet celebrities or other MTG writing websites such as magic.tcgplayer, manadeprived.com, etc.)
2: They probably pay royalties/licensing fees in order to use official Magic art.
3: Can you please clarify some of the policy changes that are causing LGS locations to suffer while online merchants are not?
Hey all, I'd like to float anm idea which has been concerning me a little bit recently. I'd like to clarify that I'm not going to go into the unverified accusations against SCG, as those have been done to death. What I'd like to ask is why Wizards show such blatant favouritism to Star City Games (and, to a lesser extent, Channel Fireball).
What makes me say this? 2 big things:
1) Preview Cards. This is the biggie - previews generate huge traffic for sites, pulling in many more readers than regular articles and also conveniently marketing the cards. It strikes me as odd that Wizards would give previews to a specific store, effectively granting them free marketing. I would imagine that this hurts other stores without a way to generate such attention - and hence I cry favouritism.
2) Playmats. SCG's event playmats for their open get to use official Magic art (copyrighted etc etc etc), while not even every GP organiser is allowed to, and individuals at home are expressly forbidden from getting mats printed with their favourite pieces! So why does SCG get this special treatment, to again generate more footfall for their events and stores?
Sorry if this seems rambling, I just don't think Wizards should put such a priority on supporting a big business while LGSs suffer with every poor choice and policy change.
/growl
Yes, it is blatant favoritism, and it extends to more than just what you mentioned here. For example, their writers seem to have info as to what cards will be banned, sometimes eerily, more than what can be explained by having pro players write.
But the favoritism has real reasons.
SCG is wizard's single biggest customer. They buy the most amount of wizard's product.
Think of it as some sort of player reward. You play more, you get stuff. SCG plays the most, and gets most of the stuff.
Not only that, they promote magic MORE than any other site or LGS. Since they promote magic so much, might as well give them the most amount of cards to preview -- it's free advertising that reaches the most amount of people. This is also the reason why when MTG magazines were still around (late 90s) that magazines got preview cards more than, say, thedojo, the largest MTG site at the time, bigger than Wizards) did. Magazines were free advertising, far more than thedoho.
As for using official art, anyone can too, as long as they contact Wizard's legal department and pay the appropriate licensing fees.
Wizards support small businesses as well. However, no LGS buys as much MTG product as SCG, no LGS promotes the game as much as SCG. It just makes more business sense to have close relations with SCG.
Okay thanks, you both make reasonable points. I still think, as a matter of course, that stores shouldn't have previews as their reputation should be built on merit (not saying SCG's isn't, I've had thoroughly pleasant experience buying from them).
License fees on art are something I hadn't considered.
I think I phrased my comments on LGSs wrong - what I'm trying to say is that a local can't pull in a huge community of players usually, so if a format goes througha dry patch, if that's the local format the shop might fail, where as SCG will just pull feweer hundreds of grinders and sell through other formats. IF there are any resources going to promote larger stores from Wizards I think they should be redirected to help smaller shops fire more formats, e.g more standard showdown esque events.
Your phrasing for your last point is hard to follow so I'm going to summarize and you can feel free to correct me. You're saying that if a store can't get in a large amount of players for a format then that format will no longer be successful locally but SCG can adjust by choosing different formats.
Isn't the local game store capable of doing the same thing by promoting different formats? Not all formats are going to be popular or have the same amount of support. This is truer for smaller areas with fewer players. In those cases it's still the onus of the store to do something, not WotC.
You mention if there are any resources going to promote larger stores from Wizards but as far as brick and mortar LGS stores go I don't see WotC pulling favorites or at least if they are it's not well advertised. Standard is the biggest selling format that WotC has and they endorse people using FNM for any format possible. That being said, creating or distributing product for formats that aren't popular, simply will not happen. They have market research available and tons of events to sift through to tell them that Standard is more popular than Modern or that Vintage and Legacy events don't happen nearly as much. After all, when was the last time you heard of people asking for more Vanguard support?
I'm sorry to hear that your local game store is having issues selling or pushing a format but that has nothing to do with SCG, CFB or even WotC.
I'm not arguing that it's SCG's fault local stores are struggling - I just think that Wizards could do more for LGSs. However I realise this point has a capacity to get wildly off topic.
I think Mondu has basically answered my question - SCG's combination of promotion and investment seem to have taken them to the top of the tree. What they do up there is up to them.
Hey all, I'd like to float anm idea which has been concerning me a little bit recently. I'd like to clarify that I'm not going to go into the unverified accusations against SCG, as those have been done to death. What I'd like to ask is why Wizards show such blatant favouritism to Star City Games (and, to a lesser extent, Channel Fireball).
What makes me say this? 2 big things:
1) Preview Cards. This is the biggie - previews generate huge traffic for sites, pulling in many more readers than regular articles and also conveniently marketing the cards. It strikes me as odd that Wizards would give previews to a specific store, effectively granting them free marketing. I would imagine that this hurts other stores without a way to generate such attention - and hence I cry favouritism.
2) Playmats. SCG's event playmats for their open get to use official Magic art (copyrighted etc etc etc), while not even every GP organiser is allowed to, and individuals at home are expressly forbidden from getting mats printed with their favourite pieces! So why does SCG get this special treatment, to again generate more footfall for their events and stores?
Sorry if this seems rambling, I just don't think Wizards should put such a priority on supporting a big business while LGSs suffer with every poor choice and policy change.
/growl
Yes, it is blatant favoritism, and it extends to more than just what you mentioned here. For example, their writers seem to have info as to what cards will be banned, sometimes eerily, more than what can be explained by having pro players write.
Okay this one always bugs me. If SCG really had insider information about bans, do you really think they'd hedge their seasonal standard playmat (the format they the most events for), and one that they pay licensing to print, on a card that got banned (copter), instantly lowering the value of something they printed god knows how many of?
Bans are always a lot easier to predict than people give them credit for. 2/3 of the recent bans were easy picks, once you knew that they were doing an early banning that is, in emrakul and copter. Copter fit the numbers game of jitte and Emrakul was entirely format warping. The last slot was more than likely going to be some hit at jeskai saheeli, though I will say that reflector mage was by no means the obvious choice, it was still a hit at the other elephant in the room and was well within the realm of possibility.
tl;dr SCG doesn't have insider info, this has been hammered time and time again, stop saying it.
I'm pretty sure a card getting banned has minimal impact on the price of a mat, if any. In fact it's more likely to add to the price depending on the notoriety of the card.
While I feel that SCG has a huge impact on the health of the game by sales, tournaments, content and such. It seems like inside trading to me if wizards is tipping off SCG about bans.
As some others have said, some of it is just money. SCG can afford to buy the licensing rights for the artwork to make their mats and stuff. That's not preferential treatment, that's just economics. Preview cards simply don't make sense to give to something as small as a normal LGS. They do, however, give preview cards to smaller websites and foreign websites that have articles on mtg to try and support them, so I think Wizards is doing fine there. With SCG being Wizards' largest customer (I assume, anyway) and probably the most frequented MTG-related site, not giving them a preview card wouldn't really make sense.
If Wizards were spending money to help SCG then I would say yes, they should probably be spending that money to help LGS' instead seeing as SCG doesn't need the help. Seeing as it's the other way around and SCG is paying for the privileges they get with artwork and such, I don't see a problem with it. Similarly, if Wizards were indeed giving information about bans and such to SCG or their writers ahead of time, that would also be a huge disappointment and something that they should stop immediately. Aside from some good calls by their speculators and writers (which can mostly be explained by them being experts on the subject), I haven't really seen evidence of this, though.
Does anyone here actually have any proof that WotC is leaking ban information to SCG? If your only answer is "Well the pros seem to have a good idea what's going to get banned." then maybe you should also look to our forums here where people claimed months ago that Emrakul was going to get banned. That Smuggler's Copter is too OP or that reflector mage could get banned. It turns out that pro players play a lot of magic and can often get things right.
What makes me say this? 2 big things:
1) Preview Cards. This is the biggie - previews generate huge traffic for sites, pulling in many more readers than regular articles and also conveniently marketing the cards. It strikes me as odd that Wizards would give previews to a sepcific store, effectively granting them free marketing. I would imagine that this hurts other stores without a way to generate such attention - and hence I cry favouritism.
2) Playmats. SCG's event playmats for their open get to use official Magic art (copyrighted etc etc etc), while not even every GP organiser is allowed to, and individuals at home are expressly forbidden from getting mats printed with their favourite pieces! So why does SCG get this special treatment, to again generate more footfall for their events and stores?
Sorry if this seems rambling, I just don't think Wizards should put such a priority on supporting a big business while LGSs suffer with every poor choice and policy change.
/growl
2: They probably pay royalties/licensing fees in order to use official Magic art.
3: Can you please clarify some of the policy changes that are causing LGS locations to suffer while online merchants are not?
Yes, it is blatant favoritism, and it extends to more than just what you mentioned here. For example, their writers seem to have info as to what cards will be banned, sometimes eerily, more than what can be explained by having pro players write.
But the favoritism has real reasons.
SCG is wizard's single biggest customer. They buy the most amount of wizard's product.
Think of it as some sort of player reward. You play more, you get stuff. SCG plays the most, and gets most of the stuff.
Not only that, they promote magic MORE than any other site or LGS. Since they promote magic so much, might as well give them the most amount of cards to preview -- it's free advertising that reaches the most amount of people. This is also the reason why when MTG magazines were still around (late 90s) that magazines got preview cards more than, say, thedojo, the largest MTG site at the time, bigger than Wizards) did. Magazines were free advertising, far more than thedoho.
As for using official art, anyone can too, as long as they contact Wizard's legal department and pay the appropriate licensing fees.
Wizards support small businesses as well. However, no LGS buys as much MTG product as SCG, no LGS promotes the game as much as SCG. It just makes more business sense to have close relations with SCG.
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
License fees on art are something I hadn't considered.
I think I phrased my comments on LGSs wrong - what I'm trying to say is that a local can't pull in a huge community of players usually, so if a format goes througha dry patch, if that's the local format the shop might fail, where as SCG will just pull feweer hundreds of grinders and sell through other formats. IF there are any resources going to promote larger stores from Wizards I think they should be redirected to help smaller shops fire more formats, e.g more standard showdown esque events.
Just my opinions
Isn't the local game store capable of doing the same thing by promoting different formats? Not all formats are going to be popular or have the same amount of support. This is truer for smaller areas with fewer players. In those cases it's still the onus of the store to do something, not WotC.
You mention if there are any resources going to promote larger stores from Wizards but as far as brick and mortar LGS stores go I don't see WotC pulling favorites or at least if they are it's not well advertised. Standard is the biggest selling format that WotC has and they endorse people using FNM for any format possible. That being said, creating or distributing product for formats that aren't popular, simply will not happen. They have market research available and tons of events to sift through to tell them that Standard is more popular than Modern or that Vintage and Legacy events don't happen nearly as much. After all, when was the last time you heard of people asking for more Vanguard support?
I'm sorry to hear that your local game store is having issues selling or pushing a format but that has nothing to do with SCG, CFB or even WotC.
I think Mondu has basically answered my question - SCG's combination of promotion and investment seem to have taken them to the top of the tree. What they do up there is up to them.
If anyone has any further insights do contribute
Okay this one always bugs me. If SCG really had insider information about bans, do you really think they'd hedge their seasonal standard playmat (the format they the most events for), and one that they pay licensing to print, on a card that got banned (copter), instantly lowering the value of something they printed god knows how many of?
Bans are always a lot easier to predict than people give them credit for. 2/3 of the recent bans were easy picks, once you knew that they were doing an early banning that is, in emrakul and copter. Copter fit the numbers game of jitte and Emrakul was entirely format warping. The last slot was more than likely going to be some hit at jeskai saheeli, though I will say that reflector mage was by no means the obvious choice, it was still a hit at the other elephant in the room and was well within the realm of possibility.
tl;dr SCG doesn't have insider info, this has been hammered time and time again, stop saying it.
https://www.twitch.tv/scgtour/v/116290627?t=2h27m10s
It is undermining.
SCG sells tons of product for Wizards and their content and tournaments drive even more sales.
If Wizards were spending money to help SCG then I would say yes, they should probably be spending that money to help LGS' instead seeing as SCG doesn't need the help. Seeing as it's the other way around and SCG is paying for the privileges they get with artwork and such, I don't see a problem with it. Similarly, if Wizards were indeed giving information about bans and such to SCG or their writers ahead of time, that would also be a huge disappointment and something that they should stop immediately. Aside from some good calls by their speculators and writers (which can mostly be explained by them being experts on the subject), I haven't really seen evidence of this, though.