Brettspiel-Forum

Like former years I will write here something about my experiences as exhibitor in Essen (and Eindhoven) and some tips about the new Cwali-games. I try to hold it short ...

It was different to former years, with a bigger booth in Essen and a 2-player-game plus a word-game as new games.

The bigger booth was an 'eye-opener'. I wondered how it would go with 7 tables in the booth. It takes more explainers-time (Arne/Björn/Denis/Erik/Marco/Svenja), but it was a pleasure to work this way. I got the impression that it is 'easier' to get 10 tables filled in a big booth than 2 in a small booth. Maybe it is like with a little shop, where you only step inside if you know that you buy something. In Eindhoven I had a small booth (40% of Essen-booth). Then visitors want an explaination first before taking seats. Speaking about seats: Not only the number of fish (in SeaSim) multiplied, the number of chairs too. Halfway Saturday we had 2 chairs more than at the start. I gave 2 to our neighbours I expected it came from, but later they realised they had more chairs than brought.

Many visitors, both in Essen and Eindhoven, were new to me. At the other hand, many visitors we knew from former years we didn't see now. Maybe a 2-player-game and a wordgame don't reach the top-10/20/30 games gamers want to check-out first in 1 or a few days at the fair. Or maybe Cwali-games have a bad reputation. :) Maybe playing 4 different games in the booth is not the way to get a new game much in the picture. The 2-player-games of 2002 (StreetSoccer) and 2003 (Subulata) we played in the booth too. And Sunday we had a StreetSoccer-tournament, with 15 players (won by Ronald). All days I met many players of the StreetSoccer-sites littlegolem.net and brettspielwelt.de. (Ca. 100.000 matches of StreetSoccer/Subulata are played on internet.) I liked that all very much, but interest in an older game doesn't help to get more interest in a new game. I already knew from colleques that that makes it more difficult to get a new game 'known'. I did things to turn it in a positive way but those attempts failed.
Or maybe simply the high number of new games made that not many (if any) games came much in the picture at the fair. If I'm well informed (I wish I could play games self all days in Essen) only limited editions, sold-out games and games with 'alernative packing' came a bit more in the picture by the Essen-release. So no good news for game-shops this Essen-fair. Maybe Pirates of the Spanish Main is the best news for game-shops last time.

*SeaSim*:
For who missed it complete ... it's a 2-player-game. The third in the series with StreetSoccer and Subulata. In the booth we only played the game with the basic rules. That's the best way to learn the game first, but I self missed the variant elements in the sea (for deseases, extra competer and new fish populations). Try that after the first learning game(s). It brings the sea-SIM theme more alive. They often bring surprises without adding a real luck-factor in the game.
The 3 variant elements seem to cover the things that simulate sea life well, but ideas for a 4th element are very welcome. Try a sail-boat, shark hunters, a fishery boat, a broken oil-ship???

*Typo*:
The reactions on Typo by the players surprised me a bit. It seemed to make even the most sceptical player smile after a few turns. The prototypes of Typo were liked too but not always as much as in the Eindhoven-booth. And in Essen, I think, but in Eindhoven with Dutch players I had a better view on how new players receive it.
In the booth we used slightly different rules to the rulebook-rules, for a shorter try without pen and paper. In the meantime I got to like those 'booth-rules' better than those rulebook-rules. There are plans for new version (other publisher, organisation). That will have those new rules.
Here the rule-differences:
Goal: Be the first to loose all your cards.
Deal cards once: Number of cards per player: 2 pl.: 14 cards. 3 pl.: 13 cards. 4 pl.: 12 cards. 5 pl.: 11 cards. 6 pl.: 10 cards.
When you can't connect your letter: The last half (rounded up) of the discarded row of cards goes to your hand. The other (first) half of the row (rounded down) goes out of the game.

-----

Essen was a phenomenon again. I'm very happy with the new Cwali-games and the reactions by the players. All in all Juan Antonio Samaranch would say "It were the best games ever." I look forward to seeing many new and 'old' visitors again next time! I hope I can do 'such' a booth in Essen next year too ...

One thing will change:
This year I only wanted to see everything positive and forget negative things. So I stayed friendly to everyone who asked for a lower price or reviewers who never heared about Cwali but wanted a review-copy ... Reacting friendly made that such things took only more time. I want to see the Essen-fair as celebrating the release of game(s), not talking each day about the prices. So next year I will react lumb again. :) By the way: In a booth with the biggest part of the booth used for demo's or playing games I think giving a tip when you buy something is more normal than asking for a lower price.

Other news: StreetSoccer will be playable on another site too. A site with many more players. (Although the 20 new tournaments per day now on littlegolem and the number of matches on BSW is much too.) I don't want to name the site before it's ready ... So no news yet.

Grusse (this word is allowed this way in Typo (it's called "typo"),
Corné (names are not allowed in Typo)
Cwali (You could agree in Typo that brand names are allowed if they are very well know ...)

I visited the Cwali booth on thursday and friday and we got a place to play Sea Sim (1. day) and Subulata (2. day) - great thing, because we didn't get a place last year and that's why we missed Subulata! It might become one of our favorite games, it gets better every time.

On the first day, we bought Sea Sim after the first test game with standard rules.
Second day, we bought Subulata after testing - and get 1 € back because we bought Sea Sim the day before! :-) Thanks a lot for this, it shows that speaking with people helps recognizing the visitors. And we didn't ask for the 1 €, I totally forgot about this and 17€ is okay for both games! So don't worry about prices!

LUdo ergo sum

Cwali schrieb:
>
> One thing will change:
> This year I only wanted to see everything positive and forget
> negative things. So I stayed friendly to everyone who asked
> for a lower price or reviewers who never heared about Cwali
> but wanted a review-copy ... Reacting friendly made that such
> things took only more time. I want to see the Essen-fair as
> celebrating the release of game(s), not talking each day
> about the prices. So next year I will react lumb again.

Please do. It’s embarrassing to watch “press people” beg for free games or discounts.

Erwin Broens schrieb:
>
> Cwali schrieb:
> >
> > One thing will change:
> > This year I only wanted to see everything positive and forget
> > negative things. So I stayed friendly to everyone who asked
> > for a lower price or reviewers who never heared about Cwali
> > but wanted a review-copy ... Reacting friendly made that such
> > things took only more time. I want to see the Essen-fair as
> > celebrating the release of game(s), not talking each day
> > about the prices. So next year I will react lumb again.

Hm, if friendly or not - this depends of what is more lucrative?
Ok, that's real business.

> Please do. It’s embarrassing to watch “press people” beg for
> free games or discounts.

If we could give free copies to press people we would do. Many of them do good jobs sometimes for good, merely for only a little money. Their work is very important for game companies and for gaming hobby in general.

Even they like their job it's work to review a game. If possible they shall not pay for doing their job. So depending on our calculation we gave a small or bigger discount (depending on the number of games we made).

best, Guenter

Erwin Broens schrieb:
> It’s embarrassing to watch “press people” beg for
> free games or discounts.

Why should they pay for games. They do promotion for the publishers!

If I have to buy all new games of smaller publishers I could NOT do this job! And I do not beg, I ask for games. If I couldn't get one for free ist ok. It's a job, sometimes hard work. It's not (only) fun because I have to play bad or boring games a few times too! And nonbody pays for my work.

Michael

Right!
I was welcomed rather unfriendly by Cwali when asking friendly for a review copy. I understand the difficulties of small publisher. But there a many ways of reviewing a game; sometimes it is not necessary to keep the game, esp. with smaller and easier games. Let's talk about it. Small publishers need publicity, so why not take the chance?
By the way, I get no money for my reviews.

Best regards
Andreas
http://www.baden-online.de/freizeit/spiele/brettspiele/index.phtml

Michael Weber|Reich der Spiele schrieb:

> Why should they pay for games. They do promotion for the
> publishers!
>
> If I have to buy all new games of smaller publishers I could
> NOT do this job! And I do not beg, I ask for games. If I
> couldn't get one for free ist ok. It's a job, sometimes hard
> work. It's not (only) fun because I have to play bad or
> boring games a few times too! And nonbody pays for my work.
>
> Michael

Not necessarily right!

There are so many so-called reviewers/press-people out there, that a small publisher (and I think, a bigger publisher, too) cannot just give out a free game or a game at a reduced price to everyone that wears this little green piece of paper at the fair. I think, before just asking for a reduced price for a game, it should be the reviewers intention to give some proof of his influence/reputation in the market and to give the publishers an idea about the worth of an "investment" into him.

We should not forget that most of the publishers out there are out to make some profit with their games - besides the idealism. So it is alway a cost/gain-analysis wether to support a reviewer or not.

Greetings from Munich

- Arne -

Arne Hoffmann schrieb:
>
> Not necessarily right!
>
> There are so many so-called reviewers/press-people out there,
> that a small publisher (and I think, a bigger publisher, too)
> cannot just give out a free game or a game at a reduced price
> to everyone that wears this little green piece of paper at
> the fair. I think, before just asking for a reduced price for
> a game, it should be the reviewers intention to give some
> proof of his influence/reputation in the market and to give
> the publishers an idea about the worth of an "investment"
> into him.

Right. There are a lot of people using a "green card" who are not really writing about games. That is a problem for Reich der Spiele an others, too. But Cwali and most of the other little publishers (most of them much smaller than Cwali) know Reich der Spiele as one of the biggest (and maybe one of the most important) german online-magazins.

> We should not forget that most of the publishers out there
> are out to make some profit with their games - besides the
> idealism. So it is alway a cost/gain-analysis wether to
> support a reviewer or not.

I understand that publishers producing only 300 or 500 can't give free copies copies. However I won't buy (unknown) games only for a review. If I do I would be a poor man.

Michael

Arne Hoffmann schrieb:
>
> Not necessarily right!
>
I think, before just asking for a reduced price for
> a game, it should be the reviewers intention to give some
> proof of his influence/reputation in the market and to give
> the publishers an idea about the worth of an "investment"
> into him.

Hi Arne,

right, if you have the chance to talk. Many publishers talk, but not all of them...

Best regards
Andreas

About those Typo-rules like used in the booth:
I forgot one thing: If your word is not believed and turns out to be wrong, then you must take one card more from the discarded row of cards. If it turns out to be right, then one player takes away one of your cards (random). This card goes out of the game.

About the other comments:

What I wrote about asking for a review-copy was: "reviewers who never heared about Cwali but wanted a review-copy".

Maybe it makes things clear when I tell in general how I work:
When I visited Spiel-Essen the first time many years ago, I didn't feel 'happy' as new visitor by the 'atmosphere' in many of the small booth. I already wrote that it's not easy to get 'unknown' visitors in a small booth. But in a part of the small booths new visitors feel like second-class visitors by how things work in the booth. I often got the feeling that a part of the visitors are 'close' with the publisher and get a first-class-treatment and a lower price for the games and that others get a second-class-treatment and must pay the full price. I decided to do that different with Cwali. Because I didn't like that (and I think it is bad for the sales too). Every visitor in the booth is for me of the same importance! Everyone can speak me when I'm in the booth about the games, other games, the weather or why Roy Makaay doesn't play in the Dutch soccer-team (I often got that question). No matter if you play a game in the booth, or look at the games, or write about games on the 'most important ...' website or are jury-member of the Spiel-des-Jahres. I try to make that people feel invited in the booth (but probably there is much to improve by the 'design' of the booth, I'm not the best in that) and the policies I made mainly to forecome that visitors feel second-class. I think I reach many more people in this way than what is 'normal' for 'small publishers'. A 'cost' can be that I'm not liked by all 'VIPs'.

One reviewer wrote here: "I was welcomed rather unfriendly".
I don't remember I was unfriendly to anyone!
(I remember one called me stupid when I didn't offer discount, but I didn't react. (I don't think that was you (I don't know you yet).))

((And to forecome again that one may think that I treat buyers different: The 1,- Euro discount for a second (different) game, as one wrote about here, was a rule for everyone.))

Grusse (this word is allowed this way in Typo),
Corné (names are not allowed in Typo)
Cwali (you could agree in Typo that brand names are allowed if they are very well know ...)

Michael Weber|Reich der Spiele schrieb:
>
> However I won't buy (unknown) games
> only for a review. If I do I would be a poor man.


Hi,

so why not run the website without the "one special review" you´re not willing to pay the game for?

Best regards,
Jürgen Karla

...who was considered to be crazy by some colleagues from other websites because of not asking neither for free copies nor for discounts anywhere...

...but who was happy to get an unexpected discount ex post after (!) writing a fair report on Clicker...


http://www.spielbar.com
Rezensionen - Downloads - Spielephotos

Günter Cornett schrieb:
>
> If we could give free copies to press people we would do.
> Many of them do good jobs sometimes for good, merely for only
> a little money. Their work is very important for game
> companies and for gaming hobby in general.
>
> Even they like their job it's work to review a game. If
> possible they shall not pay for doing their job. So depending
> on our calculation we gave a small or bigger discount
> (depending on the number of games we made).

Hi Guenter,

I should have been more specific. I have no problem with “press people” receiving review copies or discounts. I just don’t like the endless begging that some of us use to get discounts or free games. If a small publisher does not want (or isn’t able) to provide freebies, one should respect this policy.

Best wishes,


Erwin

Jürgen Karla schrieb:
> > However I won't buy (unknown) games
> > only for a review. If I do I would be a poor man.
> so why not run the website without the "one special review"
> you´re not willing to pay the game for?

So I do. It dosen't matter if reviews of a few games are not part of Reich der Spiele. I accept a "no" without discussion. But I don't want to discuss my decision with the publisher not to buy such a game, too.

Michael
(hier geht es um mein Prinzip nicht um Cwali!)

I did know about the discount, but I forgot about it when buying teh second game the second day - and I was pleased to get the discount a day later! :-)

LUdo ergo sum

About the *SeaSim* set-up rules:

One rule is mistaken sometimes. Choosing on the table with random the numbers 1-90 a row, column or whatever, to get 9 random numbers is meant to do once. Only to get 9 random startplaces for the fish populations (3 for each type). So not both players each choose a row of 9 numbers. (Then it will be 18 start places.) See example picture 1 too. (The table has the 90 numbers in a pure random order. It is meant to use pure to get a random start situation each match.)

Some players tried to choose 9 start places self for the fish populations, in 'a random way'. I don't like that and I can't advice that. What looks 'random' for humans is not really random, and a real random set-up often 'looks like it is not placed random'. If you choose 9 'random' start-places without using the numbers, then that often leads to many small fish populations and thus a slower game with not many changes in the sea and strategy during the game.
Although, in the booth in Eindhoven one copple of players placed 9 fish random at the start without looking at the numbers. It was all placed a bit in the middle of the board in my opinion, it didn't look too bad for starting but it became the only game I've ever seen ending by one player loosing all health points for the sharks (without variant elements).

About the player coples in the booth. Many matches were between man and woman. I didn't hold records but I'm quite certain that the women won most times. While men played the most fanatic most times. I had the impression that the men often looked too much at how to influense the possibilities of opponent's sharks and 'forgot' to eat enough. :)

Grusse,
Corné
Cwali

Erwin Broens schrieb:
>
> Günter Cornett schrieb:
> >
> > If we could give free copies to press people we would do.
> > Many of them do good jobs sometimes for good, merely for only
> > a little money. Their work is very important for game
> > companies and for gaming hobby in general.
> >
> > Even they like their job it's work to review a game. If
> > possible they shall not pay for doing their job. So depending
> > on our calculation we gave a small or bigger discount
> > (depending on the number of games we made).
>
> Hi Guenter,
>
> I should have been more specific. I have no problem with
> “press people” receiving review copies or discounts. I just
> don’t like the endless begging that some of us use to get
> discounts or free games. If a small publisher does not want
> (or isn’t able) to provide freebies, one should respect this
> policy.
>

Hi Erwin,

yes, to have clear rules seems to be important. We had one longer discussion about the reviewer prices of Chinagold and Capt'n W. Kidd. But that's ok and not seen by us as begging. Other reviewers accepted or didn't buy. That's ok too, of course. Both sides have less time for unproductive discussions.

But maybe our games are not attractive enough for real beggers or I look too strange to such people. ;-)

I know that there are also a few swindlers - but I'm sure this thread isn't about such people. Last year they bild a few similar standard websites, called themselves ' ...press agency', '...bureau' (many different names) and asked for games for reviewing. They didn't answer any request about. All were located in northern Germany, used the same provider but didn't had a phone number on their websites. Maybe such people are on the fair too. But I didn't met.

best, Guenter

Hallo, liebe Betriebswirtschaftler (hello, business managers),
rein ökonomisch betrachtet, kann es doch für das Verteilen von "Rezensionsexemplaren" keinen entscheidenden Unterschied zwischen "großen" und "kleinen" Verlagen geben.
Ich lege einmal zugrunde, daß jeder Verlag - ob groß oder klein - seine Erstauflage so konzipiert, daß sie in etwa seine Verkaufserwartungen abdeckt und auf dieser Basis einen angemessenen Gewinn bringt. Dann legt man die Produktionskosten auf diese Auflage um und bekommt so den Preis, den man pro Spiel nehmen muß - egal, ob die Auflage nun 10.000 oder 200 Stück beträgt.
Grob geschätzt würde ich sagen, daß die Produktionskosten im Normalfall etwa zwei- bis drei mal so hoch sind wie der Gewinn.
Das heißt, daß sich ein freies "Rezensonsexemplar" dann rechnet, wenn aufgrund der Rezension wenigstens drei Leute das Spiel kaufen, die es sonst nicht gekauft hätten.
Insoweit scheiden "Verrisse" natürlich von vornherein aus, aber nehmen wir mal an, der Hersteller ist von seinem Spiel so überzeugt, daß er eine positive Rezension erwartet. Wenn ich selber Hersteller wäre, würde ich Freiexemplare an solche Rezensenten geben, deren Reichweite und Reputation diese "Drei Käufer"-Regel zu erfüllen verspricht. Das sind sicherlich einige - aber eben nicht alle.
Oder sehe ich das falsch?
Durchkalkulierte Grüße
Benno

Nun will ich mich auch mal einklinken, weil mir das Thema sehr am Herzen liegt. Vorweg: Ich bin ziemlich genervt von den vielen Abziehern in Essen, die - wenn man mich fragt - kein Rezensionsexemplar verdient haben und durch ihre Unverschämtheit Verlegern und ernsthaften Rezensenten das Leben schwer machen.

Nun zu der 3-Käufer-pro-Rezi-Theorie:
Die Wirklichkeit ist, glaube ich, komplizierter, und man muss zwischen Tageszeitungen auf der einen und Online- und Printmagazinen auf der anderen Seite unterscheiden.
- Wer ein Magazin liest, interessiert sich bereits für Spiele und hat meistens auch schon ein paar Titel im Hinterkopf, wo er mit einem Kauf liebäugelt. Die Rezensionen in Magazinen dienen vermutlich nur als zusätzliche Entscheidungshilfe, als eine Informationsquelle von vielen. Das heißt, wenn ein Spiel gekauft wird, kann man wohl nur selten sagen, es lag ausschließlich und allein an der Rezension auf der Webseite xy oder im Heft yx.
- In Tageszeitungen tritt man als Rezensent mit seinem Thema an ein gemischtes Publikum heran. Bei einer gut geführten und etablierten Kolumne glaube ich durchaus, dass eine nennenswerte Menge von Leuten eine Rezension zum Anlass nehmen könnte, um das Spiel sofort beim örtlichen Fachhändler zu erwerben. Die Regel dürfte es allerdings nicht sein. Wenn ein Kleinverlagsspiel in einer Tageszeitung mit 100.000 bis 200.000 Auflage positiv besprochen wird, würde ich nicht drauf wetten, dass tatsächlich drei Leute das Spiel kaufen. Schon deshalb nicht, weil man es vor Ort wahrscheinlich gar nicht zu kaufen bekommt. Trotzdem halte ich Besprechungen in Tageszeitungen für wichtig:
a) Auch wenn der Leser vielleicht nicht sofort losstürmt um ein bestimmtes Spiel zu kaufen: Wenn er irgendwann später im Laden vor dem Spieleregal steht, erinnert er sich vielleicht, über Spiel xy was gelesen zu haben, und kauft es nun.
b) Für Kleinverlage ist es gewiss interessant, aussagekräftige Zitate bedeutender Medien auf ihre Webseite setzen oder für ihre Werbeung zu verwenden. "Ganz tolles Spiel" (Süddeutsche) klingt für den Normalkunden besser als "Ganz tolles Spiel" (Freakpostille xy)
c) (das Wichtigste) Wir brauchen Spiele in den Medien, um zu zeigen, dass es sie gibt; dass sie ein ernstzunehmendes Kulturgut sind, welches ernsthaft zu rezensieren sich lohnt; dass sie eine Beschäftigung nicht nur für Kinder, sondern auch für Erwachsene sind.

Kurz: Im Großen und Ganzen lohnt es sich gewiss, Rezensionsexemplare herauszugeben. In welchem Maße es sich für Kleinverlage lohnt, weiß ich nicht. Die Aus-1-mach-3-Theorie halte ich in der Realität für nicht umsetzbar.

Franz-Benno Delonge schrieb:
> rein ökonomisch betrachtet,

An economical view on review-copies is okay with me, but I did not start or write about that here. And I will not discuss that now. What I told is that I want to do other things in Essen, other than thinking and discussing about who to give games for free or with discount or whatever way. That's just because of the way I look at how to welcome visitors in the booth. (I'm raised on a vacation parc, maybe wanting to treat all visitors equal became just an automatism.) The only economical reason I can imagine for that is that it gives me time in Essen (which costs Euro 1,72 per minute when I calculate the Essen-costs) for other things.

Principiële economische groeten,
Corné

Hallo,

Udo Bartsch schrieb:
>
> Nun will ich mich auch mal einklinken, weil mir das Thema
> sehr am Herzen liegt. Vorweg: Ich bin ziemlich genervt von
> den vielen Abziehern in Essen, die - wenn man mich fragt -
> kein Rezensionsexemplar verdient haben und durch ihre
> Unverschämtheit Verlegern und ernsthaften Rezensenten das
> Leben schwer machen.

Wer waren denn Deiner Meinung nach "Abzieher" in Essen, die Rezensenten die evtl. nur behaupten welche zu sein oder
Rezensenten des Formates "xy Freakpost unbekannt"? Oder gibt es noch weitere Rezensentformate die man "Abzieher" nennen könnte?

Fragende Grüße
Thomas

Hi Thomas,

ich sehe das Problem der "Abzieher" ähnlich wie Udo und will daher mal versuchen, diesen Begriff - sehr subjektiv!! - zu definieren:
- Menschen, die mal irgendwann für eine Schülerzeitung / Gartenzeitung / Gewerkschaftszeitung u.ä.geschrieben haben, auf unerklärliche Weise in den Genuss einer Pressekarte für die Messe in Essen gekommen sind und bisher leider noch in der Kartei sind: jedes jahr erneut eine Pressekarte und unverschämtes Nachfragen nach Reziexemplaren, obwohl seit jahren keine Zeile geschrieben wurde!

- Diese Leute haben selbstverständlich keinen offiziellen Presseausweis, sondern erhalten aus unbekannten Gründen die Pressekarte, híer sollte tatsächlich der Merz Verlag - wie es wohl punktuell in diesem Jahr schon geschehen ist! - den offiziellen Presseausweis anfordern und ansonsten hier die Liste bereinigen.

- Weiterhin gibt es inzwischen zu Hauf Betreiber von Internetseiten, deren Bedeutung bei Null ist, die aber selbstverständlich alle Spiele kostenlos haben wollen ( Achtung: ich meine keinesfalls Seiten wie Luding, H@ll9000, Spielearchiv, Spielbox-online und ähnlich renommierte Pages)!

- Und leider gibt es auch unter den tatsächlich tätigen Journalisten "schwarze Schafe", die Spiele gleich im Zehnerpack für ihre Spielclubs mitnehmen wollen - auch hierhaben Kleinverlage natürlich dicke Probleme.

Aus all diesen Gründen haben die normal tätigen Rezensenten es oft schwer, die für ihre Rezis notwendigen Exemplare tatsächlich kostenlos zu erhalten, und da beißt sich dann die Katze in den Schwanz: ich kann nicht alle Spiele kaufen , da ist der Geldbeutel nicht groß genug - also schreibe ich nur über Spiele, die ich erhalte und vernachlässige die anderen, vielleicht interessanteren Spiele, die aus diesem Grund nicht bekannt werden, keine Käufer finden und dem Verlag kein neues Kapital einbringen. Ich kaufe auch heute immer noch Spiele, aber ich erwarte eigentlich, dass ich zumindest den Händlereinkaufspreis angerechnet bekomme. Ist auch das nicht der Fall, entscheide ich mich auch heute schon manchmal gegen einen Kauf und damit gegen eine Rezi - hier kommt es wirklich darauf an, wie sympatisch mir der Verlag begegnet.

nice dice und tschüss

Michael

Hallo Michael,

danke für den ausführlichen Überblick möglicher Rezensenten!

So scheint mir die Rabattvariante bis zum Händlerabgabepreis die vernünftigste und fairste Handhabung zumindest für Kleinverleger bei Rezensionsexemplaren zu sein.

Gruß

Thomas

Thomas Molnos schrieb:
> danke für den ausführlichen Überblick möglicher Rezensenten!

Ja, das gibt recht gut wieder, warum es auc h ersnthaft tätige Spiele-Rezensenten oft schwer haben. Ein weiteres Beispiel. Steffen Spiele haben dieses Jahr wegen schlechter Erfahrungen im Vorjahr (!!!) ein Formular ausgeteilt, das zum Kauf der Rezensionsexemplare verpflichtet, wenn man innerhalb eines Jahres keine Rezension geschrieben hat. Ähnliches haben Franjos auch schon gemacht. Das halte ich für sehr fair, vorausgesetzt, man erhält genügend Zeit (Beispiel Reich der Spiele: wir arbeiten die Essen-Neuheiten innerhalb eines knappen Jahres ab. Alles andere würde - um es zu übertreiben - bedeuten, dass wir ab Sommer keine Rezensionen mehr bringen können).
>
> So scheint mir die Rabattvariante bis zum Händlerabgabepreis
> die vernünftigste und fairste Handhabung zumindest für
> Kleinverleger bei Rezensionsexemplaren zu sein.

Nicht unbedingt. Siehe auch meine Postings oben. Wenn ich von rund 150 Kleinverlagsneuheiten nur einen Teil kaufen müsste (und davon natürlich einen Teil an meine Schreiber verteilen soll, was übrigens unsere Gewähr für Kelinverlage ist, dass wir wirklich nur EIN Exemplar erhalten!), wäre Reich der Spiele und wohl auch andere Webseiten in dem Umfang nicht denkbar. Letztlich fördern Rezensionen grundsätzlich und prinzipiell den Verkauf eines neuen Spiels (ja, hier gibt es natürlich Abstufungen zu machen).

Und noch einmal: Wenn die Auflage nur z. B. 300 beträgt, dann ist es für mich ebenso selbstverständlich, dass es keine kostenlose Rezensionsexemplare gibt, wie ich keine Rezensionsexemplare bei großen Auflagen kaufen werde.

Von daher wäre gerade kleineren Verlagen anzuraten, sich vor der Messe ein bisschen schlau zu machen, wer für die kostenlose Abgabe eines Rezensionsexemplares in Frage kommt. Eine so genannte Positivliste ;-) Die lässt sich ganz bestimmt gut zusammenkürzen und ein großer Teil der Inhaber grüner Karten geht leer aus.

Hier wäre übriegens tatsächlich ganz schön, wenn der Merz-Verlag ab und zu mal den Presseausweis abfragt. Wobei man dann bei einigen Kollegen wie Fank Gartner, Familie Ditt und Carsten Wesel eine Lösung finden muss. Letztlich hilft eine etwas eingeschränkte Verteilung der grünen Karten allen "echten" Spielerezensenten. Andererseits sind es mitunter echte Journalisten, die für bekannte Magazine tätig sind, Spiele bekommen, aber dort gar nicht veröffentlichen (können).

Michael

Hallo Michael,


Michael Weber|Reich der Spiele schrieb:

>
> Und noch einmal: Wenn die Auflage nur z. B. 300 beträgt, dann
> ist es für mich ebenso selbstverständlich, dass es keine
> kostenlose Rezensionsexemplare gibt, wie ich keine
> Rezensionsexemplare bei großen Auflagen kaufen werde.
>

Ist denn bisher noch kein Kleinverlag auf die Idee gekommen Leihausgaben an Rezensenten zu verteilen? Würde natürlich nur bei teuren Spielen und wirklicher Kleinauflage Sinn machen.
Oder ist dies vollkommen unüblich und *Hypothese* - ein Rezensent = vielleicht auch heimlicher Sammler- fühlt sich in seiner Leidenschaft nun eingeschränkt?

Ansonsten natürlich uneingeschränkte Zustimmung zu Deinem vorhergehenden gesamten Beitrag.

Gruß

Thomas

Thomas Molnos schrieb:
> Ist denn bisher noch kein Kleinverlag auf die Idee gekommen
> Leihausgaben an Rezensenten zu verteilen? Würde natürlich nur
> bei teuren Spielen und wirklicher Kleinauflage Sinn machen.
> Oder ist dies vollkommen unüblich und *Hypothese* - ein
> Rezensent = vielleicht auch heimlicher Sammler- fühlt sich in
> seiner Leidenschaft nun eingeschränkt?

Wird zum Teil gemacht, allerdings bei besonders "teuren" Spielen. Selbst King Arthur von Ravensburger wurde so unter die Leute gebracht. Bei kleineren (also normalen) Spielen lohnt sich meiner Meinung nach der Aufwand (wer bekommt in welcher Reihenfolge, wie ist das mit den Portokosten bei Rücksendung, wie oft kann ein Spiel rumgehen, wie lange dauert das alles)) in aller Regel nicht.

Hypothese: (zumindest bei mir) nicht zutreffend. Was die Leidenschaft angeht: Du unterschätzt die Arbeit, die hinter einer Rezension steht ...

Michael