House of Thule Collector's edition Revival. Could we have RoF and VoA too?

You've listed everything in the Collector Edition's except for ornaments. You went from, paraphrasing here, "we really only wanted teleports" (post #56) to basically saying "we want everything but maybe the illusions" in like 2 posts. lol.

You won't even respond to how Collector Edition houses are functionally different than in-game homes (available through Loyalty Vendor or Sunrise Hills).

Here's a great idea. If you truly just want the old teleports, devs don't need to re-issue old Collector Editions but merely include an old teleport (Mark of Brell, Sceptre of Draconic Calling) with current Rucksack bags and a standard home in a new bundle. A new bundle won't offend any on Live and cause the marketing problems (window shopping, scarcity) I've outlined but would allow you to receive the expansion-specific teleport.

Bull..

Now you are the one moving the goalposts.

Out of the current collector's edition for sale, House of Thule, the stuff I listed as desirable to TLP players makes up less than half the total items. Four out of ten.

I am done arguing with you. You clearly don't want to learn anything here about what TLP players actually are interested in, so there's not going to be any further point in discussing this.

You are characterizing my willingness to offer a compromise or pragmatic solution (new bundle) as "moving the goalposts"? It's actually a really smart alternative for the older teleports be included in a new bundle (Mark of Brell + 2 rucksacks or Sceptre of Draconic Calling + 2 rucksacks) to offer a pragmatic solution to TLP desires without offending Live or cause marketing problems. My position has been very consistent - and quite reasonable - at 1-2 Collector Editions per year otherwise.

I just can't understand why anyone would be against allowing people to buy old collector's edition packs that they missed. It's almost like arguing for the sake of arguing.

Right? Daybreak has no obligation to offer Collector Editions again.

My position is quite reasonable at 1-2 Collector Editions' per year (with a new set of 1-2 Collector Editions' the following year). I am not sure why it's so controversial. It's very pragmatic (prevents window shopping from eating into current CE/PE sales and maintains scarcity).

The marketing rationale against releasing a quick succession of Collector Editions below:

https://www.shopify.com/blog/using-scarcity-urgency-increase-sales

https://www.shopify.com/blog/using-scarcity-urgency-increase-sales

So, what's the similarity between a real-world material item & a digital good?

There isn't any in the context of this idea.

Once a digital item has already been created it can be endlessly reproduced in any quantity, it's like free money after the creation process i.e. via art assets, code & time to produce those.

Conversely a real world item has a whole series of limitation factors, raw material, other ongoing production aka labor/machinery maintenance costs, transportation costs, etc.etc. the supply pipeline for real goods is very reasonably expected to have a start & finish & a "run" where production is ended & switched to another item - this doesn't apply to digital goods which can in effect exist forever in availability so long as the medium they are contained within continues to exist, they don't even experience wear & tear.

Your example falls flat on it's face as it is comparing two types of very different value systems, your marketing chops are frankly inapplicable in this instant in opposition to your insistence that they are.

"Rarity" of any digital item is a completely bogus argument, if everyone who wants a special digital item gets one, and is willing to pay for it, there is really only an upside for the vendor they don't lose any money by not supplying it they only leave money on the table that they could have had by not making enough available that all players who would have wanted it got the opportunity to purchase it.

You want DayBreak to leave money on the table? okay, whatever, keep telling yourself you are right, at least you believe yourself.

Double post, sorry. I went to edit and forgot that we still have people under the age of 13 playing, apparently. Wish they'd recruit their buddies, eh.

Either your rebuttal is a blatant red herring or you simply don't understand how marketing can apply to digital goods. Your argument is like using Adam Smith or Karl Marx to refute the research of Daniel Kahnemann or Amos Tversky (behavioral economics and market psychology).

It is agreed that the supply chain of digital goods is infinite. That was never in contention. What is in contention is the marketing strategy of Daybreak for "limited edition" goods where the concept of collectability applies equally to physical and digital goods. Simply because digital goods are derived from infinite supply does not, therefore, negate the principles of marketing. Even when applied to vast quantities of a physical good (oil), do you see OPEC simultaneously release billions of barrels of oil reserves? NO, OPEC needs to create/control value. If it were true that infinite supply should necessarily negate marketing: why do games continue to market "limited edition" items (with time and availability limits; i.e. EQ's Collector Editions) and loot crates (random-number generator; i.e. EQ's Heritage Crates)? Marketing might play an even more significant role for digital goods rather than physical goods because you are creating value out of thin air.

We are considering at what point on the bell curve does Daybreak release past Collector Editions before reaching the point of diminishing returns (loss in sales over the long term) and the consumer is affected by opportunity cost.I sought to bring contemporary marketing theory (scarcity heuristic, prospect theory, theory of loss aversion, etc) to describe why Collector Edition sales should be, quite reasonably, limited. In sum, I am arguing that it is advisable to adhere to the principle of scarcity (and loss aversion) by a very controlled release of Collector Editions (at a rate of 1-2 CEs per year) so that Daybreak may realize a proper balance between cheapened digital goods and inaccessible digital goods to reach optimal value and return.

Please keep it civil. Before you go, can you define the acronym OPEC without Google?

Again, please keep it civil. Because of the lack of civility in the latest sequence of posts, I would not be opposed to locking this thread. While I would not mind continuing an academic debate, all sides have had the opportunity to air their opinions fully.

Strike that "not" out.

So long as "revival" collections are only released on servers where that expansion is unlocked or already live & not available on servers which haven't reached that content yet it makes sense. So long as once those servers for whom this doesn't appear on the store get the option to buy it later once that expansion unlocks for them.

Making "revival" editions of each expansion's prior collectors edition item doesn't hurt the long term of EQ, it helps it, players will either buy these items or they won't, they will either be putting extra money in DBG pockets or they won't, but there's no real negative except for an imagined one & the "reasonable" suggestions are based on faulty logic & false comparisons.

See my response above.

Benito, no offense meant.

PS, I am aware who OPEC is and the role they play in global markets. I also get how that ostensibly applies to the release of EQ Collector's Editions, but I guess we both just leave it in the hands of DBG here. As both a TLP and Live player I don't see many potential issues. I doubt they ready-up more than a couple of CE's per year anyway, IF they even continue the trend.

Thank you for your self-control and civility. Peace!

What I understand perfectly well is how marketing generally operates in an open environment with competitors, EverQuest is a closed system: DBG is the only vendor in a literal, absolute monopoly.

Yet again another poorly considered analogy because OPEC isn't a monolithic single-vendor monopoly & the digital goods within the collectors editions do not need to be supplied on a constant basis or people accounts stop working...

You might be considering bell curves & diminishing returns but the context within which you are doing that is completely unnecessary, what losses are you thinking of? Current expansions are not going to lose sales of current collectors editions due to the availability of past collectors editions unless they start trying to sell the exact same items in them which would completely defeat the purpose of those to begin with, again a bogus argument.

You're literally creating things out of thin air to fight against at this point consumed by some form of need to present your superior understanding of marketing, it's bordering on pathological. If there is a Red Herring here it's your whole argument.

(1) For the macro: Daybreak is not the only supplier of MMORPGs, digital entertainment or otherwise. Daybreak operates in a competitive ecosystem against other gaming companies (e.g. Blizzard).

(2) For the micro, consider this analogous firm: Apple, Inc. is the only manufacturer of the iPhone but employs marketing tactics to maintain sales (e.g. new models, premium models). Even though Apple operates as a virtual monopoly, remember the Gold Apple Watch?

That analogy and the principle involved went right over your head...

Hint: Think value of a commodity....

(1) Losses come from opportunity costs. Consumers have finite purchasing power - both between EQ items and real-life wants/needs. By controlling and limiting CE release, Daybreak, in essence, uses their power (house advantage) to curate the purchasing experience and choices.

(2) Consumers will make their purchasing decision based on the perceived value of the digital item(s). By utilizing marketing principles which suggest limiting availability, Daybreak will encourage sales through such concepts as prospect theory, theory of loss aversion, and scarcity heuristic.

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" -Oscar Wilde.

I do appreciate that you like my verbiage. Feel free to re-use that quote.

And yet you can't stop replying to every single post.

If you want the thread to stop getting further out of hand, just... stop... posting.

Pardon me, I've stopped responding to you.

I was responding to Skuz who engaged in a fair debate. Subsequently, Sundrake wanted throw out "f*ck em" and "13 year olds."

I agree. Let this thread die. I honestly don't know why my position of 1-2 Collector Edition per year is even being debated voraciously with nasty personal attacks.

Even if I signal my intent to leave this thread, someone will attempt to provoke me with some snide remark. As much as I like blasting people out of the water, I want everyone to enjoy their weekend.

I think buying the CE is a bit much, but I would love to have the ability to purchase specific items individually, such as mounts, mercenary contracts and illusions.

IMO, they should be put up when a TLP server opens the expansion for a few weeks after. There are faction items and port clickies that I think would be very desirable and sell very well, assuming they are priced right.