The Bookscan numbers are for the week September 15th to 21st right? But correct me if I am wrong, didn’t US get early LGS releases from September 3rd? Surely a better look at the numbers would be the 2nd to the 21st?
The big marketing push for 5.5 is online/digital vs physical sales for Tasha's. So yeah Hasbro didn't market 5.5 for physical sales, and physical sales are low. (Insert shocked Pikachu pic)
I dunno about not pushing physical, given the alt-art covers are physical LGS only. Between that and the digital/physical bundle offer, I’d say physical was hardly an afterthought.
They're definitely still pushing physical.
AFAIK, physical has vastly outsold digital so far before this release, and shows no real sign of changing. Folks playing around a table is still the primary market, and they mostly use books. The big push is digital as well as physical. None of us have WotC's sales data, but I bet a huge percentage of digital sales are to people who already own books, likely even the books they're buying digitally.
Do they also want the pure-digital buyers? Of course they do. Digital, with and without physical, is where the easy growth is. "All in on digital" doesn't mean dumping print, it means they're spending serious money to grow that market.
They’re clearly not ignoring a growing market segment, but they just as clearly are not neglecting the current segment that is somewhere between a cash cow and a star. There is objectively a strong demand for physical units, among both tabletop and online players. Despite arch assertions to the contrary, businesses are not in the habit of leaving massive swathes of profit spread out right before them untapped.
Hard copies are a one time sale. Digital subscriptions are a gift that keeps on giving. You think that the CEO is not learning from Adobe, or his previous employer? How many micro-transactions are created with someone using a PHB at an in-person table, versus that same person using a VTT? Further, what is the profit margin on shipping a hard copy to a store for resale, versus creating access only (NOT a PDF, like the rest of the industry) to digital material on this platform?
Which would be why they are actively expanding into the digital segment. The fallacy of your position is that you are presenting this as a one or the other dichotomy- that they can only grow online by aggressively slashing physical. That simply is not a given. They might have fewer resources to put into developing physical products independently of digital content- although I’m not sure how much of that there actually has been for a while now, but so long as physical sales remain self sustaining and they have no reason to believe stopping them will result in significantly greater profit margins from digital- which I’ll bet you Benjamins to pocket lint it wouldn’t- then there’s no fiscal reason to discontinue physical products. Their membership charges are pocket change compared to the bread and butter of selling new books in either format, and we can see that the difference in operating costs is worth maybe $10-$15 per book, which as noted above.
TLDR- Any first day Business 101 student will tell you that by all observable evidence, the physical market segment is large enough to be very profitable, and therefore will be maintained.
They’re clearly not ignoring a growing market segment, but they just as clearly are not neglecting the current segment that is somewhere between a cash cow and a star. There is objectively a strong demand for physical units, among both tabletop and online players. Despite arch assertions to the contrary, businesses are not in the habit of leaving massive swathes of profit spread out right before them untapped.
Hard copies are a one time sale. Digital subscriptions are a gift that keeps on giving. You think that the CEO is not learning from Adobe, or his previous employer? How many micro-transactions are created with someone using a PHB at an in-person table, versus that same person using a VTT?
Their book sales model is one-time sales, even digital. Given the perfect time to change that, they didn't.
Do they want subscription revenue? Seems likely. But the way they're approaching it says it's a side-line, not the main driver. The VTT will drive some subscriptions, maybe even a lot. It may even have microtransactions for cosmetics. But first and foremost, it's to get people onto DDB, where they will buy books. (And maybe also subscribe. But the people who subscribe come from the pool of people who buy books.)
Further, what is the profit margin on shipping a hard copy to a store for resale, versus creating access only (NOT a PDF, like the rest of the industry) to digital material on this platform?
Extremely complicated to answer. The margins on the books are actually pretty good, especially if they can sell them direct. (But they'll still be making money if it goes through a distributer and retailer.) The site has ongoing costs, but also gets subscription revenue from some users who buy books. In short: none of us have any idea, and it's not as simple as sale price minus fixed costs. The user who buys the digital PHB and never subscribes might eventually cost them money.
from alphastream.org: "As we stated previously, BookScan tracks the sales of all books sold in the US to big box stores. It excludes direct sales, digital sales, gaming stores, and comic book stores. It includes Amazon, though Amazon in some years (especially during the pandemic) provided either no data or partial data out of worries that it disclosed too much about Amazon sales."
basically, for something like the phb, it's useless in terms of absolute numbers.
Bumping for awareness since a lot seem to be disregarding this post. There's a large thread covering this on EN World and the TL;DR is that Bookscan data is voluntary and the 4k number was reported by a single distributor, so it obviously doesn't include any of the FGLS which WotC actually made the effort of promoting sales through them.
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
from alphastream.org: "As we stated previously, BookScan tracks the sales of all books sold in the US to big box stores. It excludes direct sales, digital sales, gaming stores, and comic book stores. It includes Amazon, though Amazon in some years (especially during the pandemic) provided either no data or partial data out of worries that it disclosed too much about Amazon sales."
basically, for something like the phb, it's useless in terms of absolute numbers.
Bumping for awareness since a lot seem to be disregarding this post. There's a large thread covering this on EN World and the TL;DR is that Bookscan data is voluntary and the 4k number was reported by a single distributor, so it obviously doesn't include any of the FGLS which WotC actually made the effort of promoting sales through them.
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
Howweirdisweird, please read the quote above yours. Your information is incomplete.
Roll for Combat has an EXTREME grudge against WotC, he makes it his business, literally, to poke holes into anything and everything WotC related, possibly even just D&D related. The numbers don't add up. In Germany it is the number one bestseller in it's category on Amazon.de, ditto for Amazon.uk. Most people in the US would buy through Beyond and FLGSs, which BookScan 99% doesn't cover. So those numbers are not the real numbers, not by a long shot. WotC stated the book is the fastest selling book in D&D history. Now sure, fastest selling is corpo speak, it can mean any number of books, but they wouldn't be making claims like that to their investors without some plausible backing. Lie to your investors, lose your investors.
1. I did not see this reported by Roll for Combat. Which isn't to mention the fallacy of your suggesting it is "wrong" by virtue of who has reported it.
2. BookScan reports what accounts for around85 percent of print book sales.
And again:
What is missing from those numbers is beside the point.
The point is the comparison.
When the very same source reports numbers for exactly the same length of sale time it is not "nothing."
Those figures are sales numbers from the first week of release for each book.
Is it possible that we are still waiting on numbers to be reported for the new PHB?
from alphastream.org: "As we stated previously, BookScan tracks the sales of all books sold in the US to big box stores. It excludes direct sales, digital sales, gaming stores, and comic book stores. It includes Amazon, though Amazon in some years (especially during the pandemic) provided either no data or partial data out of worries that it disclosed too much about Amazon sales."
basically, for something like the phb, it's useless in terms of absolute numbers.
Once again:
However "useless" it might be the differences in those two numbers is not "nothing."
You keep deflecting from the actual point to talk about how BookScan does this and does that. You earlier falsely claimed it did not even take Amazon into account. You are telling yourself anything it takes. Because you can't handle the possibility it is underperforming.
It is the same source for those two figures. The first week of release. For two different books.
However many copies go unreported because BookScan does not account for all sales is beside the point. Many went unreported for Tasha's as well!
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
And that data provider is most certainly NOT Amazon or Barnes & Noble, but Diamond Comic Distributors. No one else is currently reporting numbers from big retailers, and I wouldn't expect any for at least a few more weeks. Bookscan also doesn't include FLGS sales, which make the majority of the physical sales.
Many people on this thread at EN World pointed this out to Glicker (including FLGS owners) and he still doubled down the next day with another video swearing by Bookscan numbers.
BL: Bookscan is only reporting numbers for one account and do not reflect the full scope of how many 2024 PHB books have actually been sold. At this time, I am more inclined to believe WotC's Press Release based on statistical probability until real numbers come out. However, I do think the book is selling much better than what the naysayers say.
The Bookscan numbers are for the week September 15th to 21st right? But correct me if I am wrong, didn’t US get early LGS releases from September 3rd? Surely a better look at the numbers would be the 2nd to the 21st?
Bookscan doesn't get game stores at all.
It didn't get them for Tasha's sales figures either.
Any discussion about what BookScan does or does not "get" is missing the point.
When the same source reports a disparity in sales figures of that magnitude something is wrong. We can sit here and speculate about how perhaps Amazon's numbers have not yet been submitted but it is pure speculation and is pure speculation to satisfy the consciences of those who can't handle the idea the book might be underperforming.
It's funny watching people fall over themselves to question the credibility of what is considered the most trusted data provider in the publishing industry. Pointing out it doesn't report for friendly local game stores is a useless contribution to the discussion when that would have been the same case for the other book.
from alphastream.org: "As we stated previously, BookScan tracks the sales of all books sold in the US to big box stores. It excludes direct sales, digital sales, gaming stores, and comic book stores. It includes Amazon, though Amazon in some years (especially during the pandemic) provided either no data or partial data out of worries that it disclosed too much about Amazon sales."
basically, for something like the phb, it's useless in terms of absolute numbers.
Bumping for awareness since a lot seem to be disregarding this post. There's a large thread covering this on EN World and the TL;DR is that Bookscan data is voluntary and the 4k number was reported by a single distributor, so it obviously doesn't include any of the FGLS which WotC actually made the effort of promoting sales through them.
It did not include any of those friendly local game stores when the 130,000 figure for Tasha's in its first week of release was provided either.
The excuses in this thread are saying a ratio of sales given by the publishing industry's most trusted data provider just cannot be trusted because it doesn't get its numbers from every imaginable possible source of them. It is pure silliness.
from alphastream.org: "As we stated previously, BookScan tracks the sales of all books sold in the US to big box stores. It excludes direct sales, digital sales, gaming stores, and comic book stores. It includes Amazon, though Amazon in some years (especially during the pandemic) provided either no data or partial data out of worries that it disclosed too much about Amazon sales."
basically, for something like the phb, it's useless in terms of absolute numbers.
Bumping for awareness since a lot seem to be disregarding this post. There's a large thread covering this on EN World and the TL;DR is that Bookscan data is voluntary and the 4k number was reported by a single distributor, so it obviously doesn't include any of the FGLS which WotC actually made the effort of promoting sales through them.
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
Howweirdisweird, please read the quote above yours. Your information is incomplete.
Is there a source for that claim other than someone posted it on EnWorld?
from alphastream.org: "As we stated previously, BookScan tracks the sales of all books sold in the US to big box stores. It excludes direct sales, digital sales, gaming stores, and comic book stores. It includes Amazon, though Amazon in some years (especially during the pandemic) provided either no data or partial data out of worries that it disclosed too much about Amazon sales."
basically, for something like the phb, it's useless in terms of absolute numbers.
Bumping for awareness since a lot seem to be disregarding this post. There's a large thread covering this on EN World and the TL;DR is that Bookscan data is voluntary and the 4k number was reported by a single distributor, so it obviously doesn't include any of the FGLS which WotC actually made the effort of promoting sales through them.
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
Howweirdisweird, please read the quote above yours. Your information is incomplete.
Is there a source for that claim other than someone posted it on EnWorld?
Page 21, there's a scan of the Bookscan entry and it specifically lists Diamond Comics Distributors as the only entry. Funny thing, it was posted by Glicker himself LOL
Further, what is the profit margin on shipping a hard copy to a store for resale, versus creating access only (NOT a PDF, like the rest of the industry) to digital material on this platform?
I don't know, but you don't know either. Here's a thought, though: how much does WotC have to pay to maintain my friend's physical copy of the 2014 PHB that's been sitting on his shelf for a decade? How much do they have to pay to maintain my digital copy that lives on servers that they may or may not own which consume electricity and need to be hooked up to the internet all hours of the day and night? Sure, I might buy worthless digital extras or a subscription to offset that ongoing cost, but I also might not (spoiler: I won't). The Physical/Digital value proposition is not so obvious or lopsided as you imply, at least not for the publisher.
I do strongly believe that consumers should prefer physical or personally-hosted electronic copies (ideally a combination of the two) wherever possible though. The benefit to having control of content you own is obvious.
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
And that data provider is most certainly NOT Amazon or Barnes & Noble, but Diamond Comic Distributors. No one else is currently reporting numbers from big retailers, and I wouldn't expect any for at least a few more weeks. Bookscan also doesn't include FLGS sales, which make the majority of the physical sales.
Many people on this thread at EN World pointed this out to Glicker (including FLGS owners) and he still doubled down the next day with another video swearing by Bookscan numbers.
BL: Bookscan is only reporting numbers for one account and do not reflect the full scope of how many 2024 PHB books have actually been sold. At this time, I am more inclined to believe WotC's Press Release based on statistical probability until real numbers come out. However, I do think the book is selling much better than what the naysayers say.
You keep repeating the same thing: It doesn't account for friendly local game store sales. Neither did it do that for Tasha's.How can you not understand what is such a basic concept and just go on to repeat what is an utterly useless observation to make in this discussion?
The claim being made in that thread is that BookScan was at the time only showing numbers for a single source. It's possible. But in that post we get This sounds to me and If I were a betting man and I find this about as convincing as anything Glicker might say.
That 4,000 figure is too low and nowhere near the number of copies that have actually sold. No question. More copies have sold than that. Over 130,000? It's likely. But that's a core rule book compared to a needless supplement.
Like I said. I think Wizards misjudged this release. Too many are satisfied with the game as is. Or have hacked it to produce what they want. I know more people saying they won't bother buying the new books than I do those who have. Is that a reflection of the broader community? Maybe not. But only time will tell.
Howweirdisweird: I have an honest question. The numbers for Tasha's... When were they reported? I know they are the numbers for the first week of sales when Tasha's was released, but were all the numbers REPORTED in the first week? Because it could be that there's a lag-time between when a book is sold and when it is reported to Bookscan. So numbers regarding first week sales could lag by maybe up to 30 days? Is this possible?
Howweirdisweird: I have an honest question. The numbers for Tasha's... When were they reported? I know they are the numbers for the first week of sales when Tasha's was released, but were all the numbers REPORTED in the first week? Because it could be that there's a lag-time between when a book is sold and when it is reported to Bookscan. So numbers regarding first week sales could lag by maybe up to 30 days? Is this possible?
People have already pointed out that stores like Amazon usually provide updates at the end of the monthly sales period, so I would expect an update sometime next week. Also, this might also not happen since the 2024 PHB is classified as a toy on the backend rather than as a book.
Among other things, WotC are no longer distributing through any of the major book distributors, but direct through Hasbro, so pure bookstores are probably no longer carrying it, which is gonna affect the bookscan data. They also have a brand-new distribution channel, and also the alt-art covers and early access to game stores thing, which I believe postdates Tasha's.
The comparison to Tasha's isn't useful, even without questions about on-sale dates, reporting periods, whether or not Amazon reports, etc.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
And that data provider is most certainly NOT Amazon or Barnes & Noble, but Diamond Comic Distributors. No one else is currently reporting numbers from big retailers, and I wouldn't expect any for at least a few more weeks. Bookscan also doesn't include FLGS sales, which make the majority of the physical sales.
Many people on this thread at EN World pointed this out to Glicker (including FLGS owners) and he still doubled down the next day with another video swearing by Bookscan numbers.
BL: Bookscan is only reporting numbers for one account and do not reflect the full scope of how many 2024 PHB books have actually been sold. At this time, I am more inclined to believe WotC's Press Release based on statistical probability until real numbers come out. However, I do think the book is selling much better than what the naysayers say.
You keep repeating the same thing: It doesn't account for friendly local game store sales. Neither did it do that for Tasha's.How can you not understand what is such a basic concept and just go on to repeat what is an utterly useless observation to make in this discussion?
The claim being made in that thread is that BookScan was at the time only showing numbers for a single source. It's possible. But in that post we get This sounds to me and If I were a betting man and I find this about as convincing as anything Glicker might say.
That 4,000 figure is too low and nowhere near the number of copies that have actually sold. No question. More copies have sold than that. Over 130,000? It's likely. But that's a core rule book compared to a needless supplement.
Like I said. I think Wizards misjudged this release. Too many are satisfied with the game as is. Or have hacked it to produce what they want. I know more people saying they won't bother buying the new books than I do those who have. Is that a reflection of the broader community? Maybe not. But only time will tell.
And your claim is anecdotal, so it also doesn't have any relevance. Just because you know people that are not buying the book doesn't mean that is a majority opinion, so leave the conjectures out and bring facts before making a case.
Fact: Bookscan was reporting ONE single account for the week of 15-21 Sep (See post here)
Fact: A few youtube creators used that to generate ragebait videos about how the book was not selling well
Fact: Bookscan doesn't include FLGS numbers in their reports, as you've so graciously pointed out.
Fact: WotC claims the 2024 PHB has sold 3 times as much as the 2014 PHB did at launch, and has already surpassed Tasha's sales.
Fact: We know Tasha's sold approx. 130k at release based on Bookscan numbers for the period, and WotC considered it the fastest selling book released prior to the 2024 PHB. We also know that this was just what was reported to Bookscan and doesn't include FLGS data.
Conjecture: Based on this data, it's likely the 2024 PHB has sold more than 130k physical books since 3 September when FLGS started the early sales, and has probably surpassed Tasha's combined number for the period.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Bookscan doesn't get game stores at all.
They're definitely still pushing physical.
AFAIK, physical has vastly outsold digital so far before this release, and shows no real sign of changing. Folks playing around a table is still the primary market, and they mostly use books. The big push is digital as well as physical. None of us have WotC's sales data, but I bet a huge percentage of digital sales are to people who already own books, likely even the books they're buying digitally.
Do they also want the pure-digital buyers? Of course they do. Digital, with and without physical, is where the easy growth is. "All in on digital" doesn't mean dumping print, it means they're spending serious money to grow that market.
Which would be why they are actively expanding into the digital segment. The fallacy of your position is that you are presenting this as a one or the other dichotomy- that they can only grow online by aggressively slashing physical. That simply is not a given. They might have fewer resources to put into developing physical products independently of digital content- although I’m not sure how much of that there actually has been for a while now, but so long as physical sales remain self sustaining and they have no reason to believe stopping them will result in significantly greater profit margins from digital- which I’ll bet you Benjamins to pocket lint it wouldn’t- then there’s no fiscal reason to discontinue physical products. Their membership charges are pocket change compared to the bread and butter of selling new books in either format, and we can see that the difference in operating costs is worth maybe $10-$15 per book, which as noted above.
TLDR- Any first day Business 101 student will tell you that by all observable evidence, the physical market segment is large enough to be very profitable, and therefore will be maintained.
Their book sales model is one-time sales, even digital. Given the perfect time to change that, they didn't.
Do they want subscription revenue? Seems likely. But the way they're approaching it says it's a side-line, not the main driver. The VTT will drive some subscriptions, maybe even a lot. It may even have microtransactions for cosmetics. But first and foremost, it's to get people onto DDB, where they will buy books. (And maybe also subscribe. But the people who subscribe come from the pool of people who buy books.)
Extremely complicated to answer. The margins on the books are actually pretty good, especially if they can sell them direct. (But they'll still be making money if it goes through a distributer and retailer.) The site has ongoing costs, but also gets subscription revenue from some users who buy books. In short: none of us have any idea, and it's not as simple as sale price minus fixed costs. The user who buys the digital PHB and never subscribes might eventually cost them money.
Bumping for awareness since a lot seem to be disregarding this post. There's a large thread covering this on EN World and the TL;DR is that Bookscan data is voluntary and the 4k number was reported by a single distributor, so it obviously doesn't include any of the FGLS which WotC actually made the effort of promoting sales through them.
BookScan accounts for print book sales on Amazon. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Barnes & Noble are selling the new PHB. So where are you getting this idea that "no major book distributors" are selling the thing?
The figures reflect print book sales for the first week of release.
In its first week of release Tasha's sole 130,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
In its first week of release the new PHB sold less than 4,000 copies that were reported by that data provider.
That isn't nothing. No matter how much you conjure up all manner of variables that might have impacted these numbers.
Howweirdisweird, please read the quote above yours. Your information is incomplete.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
1. I did not see this reported by Roll for Combat. Which isn't to mention the fallacy of your suggesting it is "wrong" by virtue of who has reported it.
2. BookScan reports what accounts for around 85 percent of print book sales.
And again:
What is missing from those numbers is beside the point.
The point is the comparison.
When the very same source reports numbers for exactly the same length of sale time it is not "nothing."
Those figures are sales numbers from the first week of release for each book.
Is it possible that we are still waiting on numbers to be reported for the new PHB?
It is.
But that is speculation. Nothing more.
Once again:
However "useless" it might be the differences in those two numbers is not "nothing."
You keep deflecting from the actual point to talk about how BookScan does this and does that. You earlier falsely claimed it did not even take Amazon into account. You are telling yourself anything it takes. Because you can't handle the possibility it is underperforming.
It is the same source for those two figures. The first week of release. For two different books.
However many copies go unreported because BookScan does not account for all sales is beside the point. Many went unreported for Tasha's as well!
And that data provider is most certainly NOT Amazon or Barnes & Noble, but Diamond Comic Distributors. No one else is currently reporting numbers from big retailers, and I wouldn't expect any for at least a few more weeks. Bookscan also doesn't include FLGS sales, which make the majority of the physical sales.
Many people on this thread at EN World pointed this out to Glicker (including FLGS owners) and he still doubled down the next day with another video swearing by Bookscan numbers.
BL: Bookscan is only reporting numbers for one account and do not reflect the full scope of how many 2024 PHB books have actually been sold. At this time, I am more inclined to believe WotC's Press Release based on statistical probability until real numbers come out. However, I do think the book is selling much better than what the naysayers say.
It didn't get them for Tasha's sales figures either.
Any discussion about what BookScan does or does not "get" is missing the point.
When the same source reports a disparity in sales figures of that magnitude something is wrong. We can sit here and speculate about how perhaps Amazon's numbers have not yet been submitted but it is pure speculation and is pure speculation to satisfy the consciences of those who can't handle the idea the book might be underperforming.
It's funny watching people fall over themselves to question the credibility of what is considered the most trusted data provider in the publishing industry. Pointing out it doesn't report for friendly local game stores is a useless contribution to the discussion when that would have been the same case for the other book.
It did not include any of those friendly local game stores when the 130,000 figure for Tasha's in its first week of release was provided either.
The excuses in this thread are saying a ratio of sales given by the publishing industry's most trusted data provider just cannot be trusted because it doesn't get its numbers from every imaginable possible source of them. It is pure silliness.
Is there a source for that claim other than someone posted it on EnWorld?
Page 21, there's a scan of the Bookscan entry and it specifically lists Diamond Comics Distributors as the only entry. Funny thing, it was posted by Glicker himself LOL
I don't know, but you don't know either. Here's a thought, though: how much does WotC have to pay to maintain my friend's physical copy of the 2014 PHB that's been sitting on his shelf for a decade? How much do they have to pay to maintain my digital copy that lives on servers that they may or may not own which consume electricity and need to be hooked up to the internet all hours of the day and night? Sure, I might buy worthless digital extras or a subscription to offset that ongoing cost, but I also might not (spoiler: I won't). The Physical/Digital value proposition is not so obvious or lopsided as you imply, at least not for the publisher.
I do strongly believe that consumers should prefer physical or personally-hosted electronic copies (ideally a combination of the two) wherever possible though. The benefit to having control of content you own is obvious.
You keep repeating the same thing: It doesn't account for friendly local game store sales. Neither did it do that for Tasha's. How can you not understand what is such a basic concept and just go on to repeat what is an utterly useless observation to make in this discussion?
The claim being made in that thread is that BookScan was at the time only showing numbers for a single source. It's possible. But in that post we get This sounds to me and If I were a betting man and I find this about as convincing as anything Glicker might say.
That 4,000 figure is too low and nowhere near the number of copies that have actually sold. No question. More copies have sold than that. Over 130,000? It's likely. But that's a core rule book compared to a needless supplement.
Like I said. I think Wizards misjudged this release. Too many are satisfied with the game as is. Or have hacked it to produce what they want. I know more people saying they won't bother buying the new books than I do those who have. Is that a reflection of the broader community? Maybe not. But only time will tell.
Howweirdisweird: I have an honest question. The numbers for Tasha's... When were they reported? I know they are the numbers for the first week of sales when Tasha's was released, but were all the numbers REPORTED in the first week? Because it could be that there's a lag-time between when a book is sold and when it is reported to Bookscan. So numbers regarding first week sales could lag by maybe up to 30 days? Is this possible?
Has the book even been on sale for a week?? Personally I've only just received my preorder...
Would the preorder bundle sales be counted as single book sales??
People have already pointed out that stores like Amazon usually provide updates at the end of the monthly sales period, so I would expect an update sometime next week. Also, this might also not happen since the 2024 PHB is classified as a toy on the backend rather than as a book.
And your claim is anecdotal, so it also doesn't have any relevance. Just because you know people that are not buying the book doesn't mean that is a majority opinion, so leave the conjectures out and bring facts before making a case.
Fact: Bookscan was reporting ONE single account for the week of 15-21 Sep (See post here)
Fact: A few youtube creators used that to generate ragebait videos about how the book was not selling well
Fact: Bookscan doesn't include FLGS numbers in their reports, as you've so graciously pointed out.
Fact: WotC claims the 2024 PHB has sold 3 times as much as the 2014 PHB did at launch, and has already surpassed Tasha's sales.
Fact: We know Tasha's sold approx. 130k at release based on Bookscan numbers for the period, and WotC considered it the fastest selling book released prior to the 2024 PHB. We also know that this was just what was reported to Bookscan and doesn't include FLGS data.
Conjecture: Based on this data, it's likely the 2024 PHB has sold more than 130k physical books since 3 September when FLGS started the early sales, and has probably surpassed Tasha's combined number for the period.