Just thought this was an interesting read. Emphasis is theirs. By the way, they never mention Wizards of the Coast or Dungeons & Dragons in connection with the statements below.
Our business is dependent on intellectual property rights and we may not be able to protect such rights successfully. In addition, we have a material amount of acquired product rights which, if impaired, would result in a reduction of our income.
Our intellectual property, including our license agreements and other agreements that establish our ownership rights and maintain the confidentiality of our intellectual property, are of great value. We rely on a combination of trade secret, copyright, trademark, patent and other proprietary rights laws to protect our rights to valuable intellectual property related to our brands. From time to time, third parties have challenged, and may in the future try to challenge, our ownership of our intellectual property. In addition, our business is subject to the risk of third parties counterfeiting our products or infringing on our intellectual property rights. We may need to resort to litigation to protect our intellectual property rights, which could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources. Our failure to protect our intellectual property rights could harm our business and competitive position. Much of our intellectual property has been internally developed and has no carrying value on our balance sheet. As of December 30, 2007, we had approximately $486,232 of acquired product and licensing rights included in other assets on our balance sheet. Declines in the profitability of the acquired brands or licensed products may impact our ability to recover the carrying value of the related assets and could result in an impairment charge. Reduction in our net income caused by impairment charges could harm our financial results.
As a follow-up, if you listen to their Investor Meeting at Toy Fair 2008 from their investor web site, they do say that their main goal is to drive revenue from more digital/online gaming.
My inference is that Gleemax (as they specifically mention) and reinventing D&D as an online experience is a direct result of this focus. I think the redesign of D&D for 4th was directly in line with this. If you are going to launch an online roleplaying game, as they believe the virtual table-top to be, then in order to compete with WoW, your game has to feel like a MMORPG.
It's not a defense or a criticism, it's a reality. *sigh*
I wonder if part of that is a subtle warning to companies planning to make 4e material without signing onto the GSL. I say that because, regardless of what the IP laws are, any company can sue any other for just about any reason. They may not win, but they can drown them in legal fees just the same.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I actually AM an investor in Hasbro (their stock is doing great this year BTW) and they often don't mention D&D in their annual reports. When they do mention WOTC, it's most often regarding Pokemon and Magic the Gathering.
I think the above quote probably has more to do with Scrabble than with D&D actually. There have been many mainstream media stories about Hasbro vigorously pursuing the Scrabbulous web gadget which is not a licensed version of the Scrabble game. This is a much bigger deal to Hasbro than D&D and the GSL.
I actually AM an investor in Hasbro (their stock is doing great this year BTW) and they often don't mention D&D in their annual reports. When they do mention WOTC, it's most often regarding Pokemon and Magic the Gathering.
I think the above quote probably has more to do with Scrabble than with D&D actually. There have been many mainstream media stories about Hasbro vigorously pursuing the Scrabbulous web gadget which is not a licensed version of the Scrabble game. This is a much bigger deal to Hasbro than D&D and the GSL.
In their investor meeting, their stock buyback is contributing to their lower debt and improving your performance. If I understand it correctly.
My inference is that Gleemax (as they specifically mention) and reinventing D&D as an online experience is a direct result of this focus. I think the redesign of D&D for 4th was directly in line with this. If you are going to launch an online roleplaying game, as they believe the virtual table-top to be, then in order to compete with WoW, your game has to feel like a MMORPG.
More to the point, it has to have a closed, well-defined ruleset that can be implemented in the rules engine of the online tabletop.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I actually AM an investor in Hasbro (their stock is doing great this year BTW) and they often don't mention D&D in their annual reports. When they do mention WOTC, it's most often regarding Pokemon and Magic the Gathering.
I think the above quote probably has more to do with Scrabble than with D&D actually. There have been many mainstream media stories about Hasbro vigorously pursuing the Scrabbulous web gadget which is not a licensed version of the Scrabble game. This is a much bigger deal to Hasbro than D&D and the GSL.
In their investor meeting, their stock buyback is contributing to their lower debt and improving your performance. If I understand it correctly.
Yes, and they are continuing to practically print money with the sales of toys for hot brands and licesnses like Transformers, Star Wars, Iron Man, etc.
Yes, and they are continuing to practically print money with the sales of toys for hot brands and licesnses like Transformers, Star Wars, Iron Man, etc.
LOL. I just realized you're MAKING money off of 4E! CRUEL CRUEL WORLD!
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Yes, and they are continuing to practically print money with the sales of toys for hot brands and licesnses like Transformers, Star Wars, Iron Man, etc.LOL. I just realized you're MAKING money off of 4E! CRUEL CRUEL WORLD!
Yes, it's ironic that I originaly bought Hasbro stock when they acquired Wizards so I could own a piece of D&D, but the stock has increased in value inversely with my like of the handling of D&D. Now I tell myself that I'm making money on action figures and stuff, and try to forget that 4E is part of the mix. It helps me sleep at night. :)
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Yes, it's ironic that I originaly bought Hasbro stock when they acquired Wizards so I could own a piece of D&D, but the stock has increased in value inversely with my like of the handling of D&D. Now I tell myself that I'm making money on action figures and stuff, and try to forget that 4E is part of the mix. It helps me sleep at night. :)Yes, and they are continuing to practically print money with the sales of toys for hot brands and licesnses like Transformers, Star Wars, Iron Man, etc.LOL. I just realized you're MAKING money off of 4E! CRUEL CRUEL WORLD!
Do you own a piece of Candyland? That's my favorite game ever. Kicks the crap out of this lame RPG stuff anyday.
Do you own a piece of Candyland? That's my favorite game ever. Kicks the crap out of this lame RPG stuff anyday.
I heard Candyland is the new Campaign Setting for 4E.
Chocolate Orcs vs Candy Cane Eladrin
Yay synergy!
I was going to respond but this conversation has just gotten silly.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Do you own a piece of Candyland? That's my favorite game ever. Kicks the crap out of this lame RPG stuff anyday.
If you like Candyland, try out Run For Your Life, Candyman!. It's a fun boardgame that takes Candyland in an entirely new direction.
As to your original question, yes, I also own a piece of Candland, not to mention My Little Pony. I know Sebastian will be jealous.
I was going to respond but this conversation has just gotten silly.
You were expecting maturity perhaps?
Re: Investor Podcast
It's funny to listen to a high-level investor meeting at which they discuss My Little Pony and The Littlest Pet Shop like they were selling cans of corn.
You were expecting maturity perhaps?
Never!
I actually AM an investor in Hasbro (their stock is doing great this year BTW) and they often don't mention D&D in their annual reports. When they do mention WOTC, it's most often regarding Pokemon and Magic the Gathering
Why would they still be talking about Pokemon? WotC hasn't made that for about 6 years now.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I actually AM an investor in Hasbro (their stock is doing great this year BTW) and they often don't mention D&D in their annual reports. When they do mention WOTC, it's most often regarding Pokemon and Magic the GatheringWhy would they still be talking about Pokemon? WotC hasn't made that for about 6 years now.
Well, when talking about annual reports, being annual, they only come out once a year, and when generalizing about them, there's only so many of them since Hasbro bought Wizards, and when they did mention Wizards, Pokemon was one of the main reasons....back in the day. I wasn't trying to imply that the more recent annual reports mentioned Pokemon.
Well, when talking about annual reports, being annual, they only come out once a year, and when generalizing about them, there's only so many of them since Hasbro bought Wizards, and when they did mention Wizards, Pokemon was one of the main reasons....back in the day. I wasn't trying to imply that the more recent annual reports mentioned Pokemon.
I thought I heard them mention a Pokemon RPG... using 3.5 rules!!!
|
|
Well, when talking about annual reports, being annual, they only come out once a year, and when generalizing about them, there's only so many of them since Hasbro bought Wizards, and when they did mention Wizards, Pokemon was one of the main reasons....back in the day. I wasn't trying to imply that the more recent annual reports mentioned Pokemon.I thought I heard them mention a Pokemon RPG... using 3.5 rules!!!
I personally don't like hasbro, in fact I don't like ANY large headless brainless number crunching company. However then again I am a semi anarchist/rebel in training. So maybe that doesn't matter. What Does Matter is that people who only care about $ are making radical alterations to something they don't understand or care about. That something is Dnd. I have read and studied and thought about 4.0 for some time now. My conclusion is although it has a lot of interesting strong points and is fun to play on its own, and I emphasize that I DON'T DISLIKE IT, it's kind of faddish, and talks down to the old players/dm's a lot. It also makes the game overly simplistic indeed, insanely generic. Might as well be BESM if any of you guys know what im talking about there. But I digress, the point is that I think dnd is dead and buried. The vulchers aka hasbro is just picking its bones. If it wasn't for me discovering paizo I probably wouldn't even be online looking at any dnd sites anymore. just playing at home with my old crew, you know the ones in the basement(sorry couldn't resist that I have a bad sense of humor).
keep up the good work paizo, don't turn into hasbro/wizards ok? Keep the game alive.
*wonders if this had anything to do with the topic.....anyway*
Forgive me for cross posting this at ENWorld, but it seemed relevant to the discussion.
[Anrgy rant against 4e comparing it to BESM]
I happen to like BESM.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
This is a risk factor, it's a way for the Company to meet their disclosure obligations by providing their (potential) investors with a list of all the risks relevant to their business. That way, if you invest in Hasbro, and they, for example, lose their license to make Batman/Star Wars/whatever toys, which causes their stock price to fall dramatically, you can't sue and say "you never told me that your business was dependent upon your licensing."
I wouldn't read much into this risk factor, and I certainly wouldn't read into it anything regarding D&D. The lawyers that drafted this most certainly did not know of the product lines of every Hasbro subsidiary, and absolutely did not draft this as a means of communicating with the competitors of such product lines. Risk factors are tailored to provide investor information and they are drafted by lawyers who are not directly involved in the business or business strategy of the Company.
Also, the fact that D&D is not mentioned in the filing shows how insignificant it is to Hasbro.
Our business is dependent on intellectual property rights and we may not be able to protect such rights successfully. In addition, we have a material amount of acquired product rights which, if impaired, would result in a reduction of our income.
Our intellectual property, including our license agreements and other agreements that establish our ownership rights and maintain the confidentiality of our intellectual property, are of great value. We rely on a combination of trade secret, copyright, trademark, patent and other proprietary rights laws to protect our rights to valuable intellectual property related to our brands. From time to time, third parties have challenged, and may in the future try to challenge, our ownership of our intellectual property. In addition, our business is subject to the risk of third parties counterfeiting our products or infringing on our intellectual property rights. We may need to resort to litigation to protect our intellectual property rights, which could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources. Our failure to protect our intellectual property rights could harm our business and competitive position. Much of our intellectual property has been internally developed and has no carrying value on our balance sheet. As of December 30, 2007, we had approximately $486,232 of acquired product and licensing rights included in other assets on our balance sheet. Declines in the profitability of the acquired brands or licensed products may impact our ability to recover the carrying value of the related assets and could result in an impairment charge. Reduction in our net income caused by impairment charges could harm our financial results.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I actually AM an investor in Hasbro (their stock is doing great this year BTW) and they often don't mention D&D in their annual reports. When they do mention WOTC, it's most often regarding Pokemon and Magic the Gathering.
I think the above quote probably has more to do with Scrabble than with D&D actually. There have been many mainstream media stories about Hasbro vigorously pursuing the Scrabbulous web gadget which is not a licensed version of the Scrabble game. This is a much bigger deal to Hasbro than D&D and the GSL.
This is much more likely than anything to do with the GSL/D&D. I seriously doubt the Hasbro execs who participated in the call know/care about the performance of D&D. It's just not that relevant to their job. They care about the overall performance and health of the Company, and that is driven by its most significant products, which are the ones disclosed in their filings. The fact that D&D is not mentioned in Hasbro filings shows how insignificant it is to the Company's overall business.
Also, the fact that D&D is not mentioned in the filing shows how insignificant it is to Hasbro.
That is what I find sadest of all.