# Ingram Sales Numbers of D&D 4th Edition Books



## sfield (Apr 11, 2009)

*Real Numbers Analysis and the Book Industry* 
As I was reviewing the lawsuit information it states that they have sold hundreds of thousand of "Core Books" 

If you go to Wizards website and look at their product list almost every "Core" book is included with the exception of Forgotten Realms. I'm thinking they are pulling a fast one on the definition of Core Books not just to mean the 3 Core Books. I've have been trying to find hard sales figures and until now have been unsuccessful. Doing a google search I found out about the Ingram Inventory Automated Checker. 

Ingram is a book supplier (one of the largest) that you can obtian sales numbers through. They have an automated system (615) 213-6803 and all you have to do is type in a ISBN number and it will give you the sales numbers for the books they have distributed for Last year and the current year. You can check my numbers if you like. I also didn't check every book but most of them.

I have read on other websites that if you multiply by a factor of 6 these numbers somewhat represent US sales. I don't know if that is true. There are some pay for service firms that will provide hard numbers as well. I don't feel the need to pay for those services. 

However, from what I see in Chicago, the books are not selling well at the local game shops and Borders and Barnes and Nobles have significantly shrunk the area in the store where they sell the books and maintain fewer copies. 

BTW: Even though the PHB2 is suppoed to be sold out I have found it for sale in dozens of stores with mutliple copies still for sale. In any case these are some REAL hard numbers of sale and I would say they are a bit dissapointing.

Taken as of 4/9/2009
In any case from the system:
The 4th Edition Core Gift Set
YTD: 123 2008: 2,200

The 4th Edition Players Hand Book
YTD: 197 2008: 5,785

The 4th Edition Deluxe Players Handbook
YTD: 1 2008: 25

Totalled: 8,331 copies of the Players Handbook have sold.
If we multiply that by 6 (See Above) that gives us a sales level of 49,986 units.

The Players Handbook II:
YTD: 1,440 2008: N/A

With the Multiplier factor we get: 8,640 units

To be on the best seller list I have also read that you can get on with sales at a minimum level of 5,000 weekly units. The fact that PHB2 is higher rated than the PHB on the New York times bestseller list means nothing. It is all based on how the competeting books are doing. I believe the print run for PHB2 is lower than PHB1. 

If you look at the rest of the numbers you will see that their accessory products don't sell that well.

Take it for what it's worth but they are real numbers at least.

4th Edition Core Rulebook Gift Set
YTD: 123 2008: 2,200
Adventurer's Vault
YTD: 116 2008: 1,127
An Adventurer's Guide to Eberron: 0786948558 
YTD: 8 2008: 88
D&D Dungeon Tiles VI: Fane of the Forgotten Gods 0786948000
YTD: 52 2008: 252
Draconomicon I:
YTD: 68 2008: 132
DU1 Halls of the Giant Kings Dungeon Tile 0786948736 
YTD: 0 2008: 256 
DU2 Streets of Shadow Dungeon Tiles 0786949791 
YTD: 255 2008: 244
Dungeon Delve 0786951397 
YTD: 362 2008: 0
Dungeon Master's Guide 0786948809 
YTD: 82 2008: 1,440
Dungeon Master's Screen 0786949279
YTD: 180 2008: 485
Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide
YTD: 61 2008: 603
Forgotten Realms Player's Guide 0786949295 
YTD: 151 2008: 1,666
H1 Keep on the Shadowfell 0786948507 
YTD: 120 2008: 828
H2 Thunderspire Labrynth 0786948728 
YTD: 11 2008: 326
H3 Pyramid of Shadows 078694935X 
YTD: 36 2008: 238
Manual of the Planes
YTD: 309 2008: 519
Monster Manual 0786948523 
YTD: 124 2008: 2,237
Open Grave 0786950692 
YTD: 124 2008: 2237
P1 King of the Trollhaunt Warrens 0786949287 
YTD: 15 2008: 137
P2 Demon Queen's Enclave 0786949775 
YTD: 47 2008: 47
P3 Assault on Nightwyrm Fortress 0786950005 
YTD: 18 2008: 0
Players Handbook
YTD: 197 2008: 5,785
Wizards Presnts: Worlds and Monsters 0786948027 
YTD: 7 2008: 523
Players Handbook 2
YTD: 1,440 2008: N/A
Deluxe Players Handbook 0786950439 
YTD: 1 2008: 25
Deluxe DM's Guide 0786950447 
YTD: 0 2008: 19
Deluxe Monster Manual 0786950455 
YTD: 1 2008: 14
3.5 Players Handbook: 0786928867 
YTD: 0 2008: 426

The automated site also supplies expected demand number for the week and sales last week. This is the best you are going to do for Free. It only goes back to 2008.


----------



## charlesatan (Apr 11, 2009)

I'd just like to clarify that yes, Ingram is one of the bigger book distributors out there but they're not the only one.

If you're a comic or a gaming shop for example, it's most likely that your distributor is Diamond rather than Ingram. Whether your comic store of gaming store is capable of acquiring titles from Ingram, you should ask them.

Ingram sales figures most likely represents RPG books that are sold in bookstores. So this is only a piece of the bigger pie.

I'm not sure about Amazon, whether they're their own distributor or if they acquire it from Ingram or someone else.

As for the x6 multiplier, that's about right. It's usually the difference between "circulation" vs. "subscription" (the former uses the multiplier). For example, if there's six of you in a family, most likely one of you only buys the newspaper and passes it around. This is what the multiplier is for. It's usually utilized more for periodicals rather than books, although books also have a pass around rate.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 11, 2009)

Y'know, I hear the chicken entrails work about as accurately as well.

Perhaps we should try tea leaves?  Careful, might see a grim.

I hear a dog bark at the full moon tonight, that means that 4e is a failure apparently.

Good grief.


----------



## Ycore Rixle (Apr 11, 2009)

Interesting. I think you might have typed in Monster Manual's numbers for Open Grave (unless they really did do identical numbers, which sure would speak well for Open Grave!).


----------



## evilref (Apr 11, 2009)

Ingram figures are notoriously inaccurate and I don't know anyone in the industry who relies on them.

While I don't have access to the figures in my current position, I know in the past i;ve found Ingram's numbers to be inaccurate both in terms of what they'd bought from us (the mainstream, traditional non-rpg publisher I was working for when I had access to our total sales figures) and widely inaccurate compared to the industry at large/total sales figures - certainly no where near a 6x ratio.

Moreover, unless someone from WotC says it's changed, high street bookstores do not make up the majority of their sales figures. Diamond/Alliance distributors ship to game stores, Amazon handles itself etc. As such i'd be unsurprised to hear Ingram makes up less than 5% of their sales.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Apr 11, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Y'know, I hear the chicken entrails work about as accurately as well.
> 
> Perhaps we should try tea leaves?  Careful, might see a grim.
> 
> ...




Nice rebuttal! Burn!


----------



## arscott (Apr 11, 2009)

It's worth noting that Ingram distributes primarily to _independant_ bookstores.  Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Borders, and the like all act as their own distributors, while Game Stores will get their books through a game distributor like Alliance.

So the ingram numbers represent the tiny sliver of folks who chose not to buy from the internet, not to buy from the big book chains, and not to buy from their Friendly Local Gaming Stores, but instead got their PHBs from some place called "Larry's Book Nook" or the like.

I'm honestly surprised that Ingram sold more than 10 PHBs.


----------



## Wombat (Apr 11, 2009)

One of the largest problems in trying to determine book sales, having briefly worked in the industry, is sales-to-stores as opposed to sales-to-customers.  

For example, a New York Times Best Seller does not get that banner because of the number of those books in the hands of customers, but base rather on the number of _pre_-orders from various stores and chains.  As such, the latest R.A. Salvatore novel can have "New York Times Best Seller" printed on it from the first day ... _*or *_it can have it on there because a _previous _book of his was on the list.  Equally, the criteria for what makes a Nonfiction Best Seller is _vastly _lower than a Fiction Best Seller.  

Now when you see hot selling books from two years ago in a remainder bin ... well, that is due to over-purchasing.  Maybe that "best seller" didn't go over as well as anticipated and now you have blow a $30 hard cover out the door for $5.  

Book sales are difficult to calculate because different groups use different criteria -- a publisher may base this on "number sent to stores" while a stores may base this on "number of copies sold new" (as opposed to remaindered or given away or whatever).

So, yeah, numbers a tricksy things...


----------



## Knight Otu (Apr 11, 2009)

Hussar said:


> Y'know, I hear the chicken entrails work about as accurately as well.
> 
> Perhaps we should try tea leaves?  Careful, might see a grim.
> 
> ...




Are you saying this is just sales numerology?


----------



## Treebore (Apr 11, 2009)

Even if Ingrams numbers suck the OP does raise a real good question, what does WOTC mean in their court documents by "Core Rule Books"? We assume they mean the PH, DMG, and MM, but if they actually mean pretty much the whole line? Well, that would change the "picture" of WOTC dominance even more drastically than it did when we discovered that WOTC serves no where near "6 Million D&D gamers World Wide".

So if their "Core Books" do include pretty much their entire line, that would put WOTC sales much closer in line with Paizo sales.

So knowing exactly what definition WOTC used in that court document is rather important.


----------



## darjr (Apr 11, 2009)

Treebore said:


> Even if Ingrams numbers suck the OP does raise a real good question, what does WOTC mean in their court documents by "Core Rule Books"? We assume they mean the PH, DMG, and MM, but if they actually mean pretty much the whole line? Well, that would change the "picture" of WOTC dominance even more drastically than it did when we discovered that WOTC serves no where near "6 Million D&D gamers World Wide".
> 
> So if their "Core Books" do include pretty much their entire line, that would put WOTC sales much closer in line with Paizo sales.
> 
> So knowing exactly what definition WOTC used in that court document is rather important.




Treebore, come on now. If you read the document it's clear they mean the first three books. They even state that those books were on their third printing. Then they start to talk about phb2.

Did you really just convince yourself that paizo and wotc sales are equivalent? Maybe someday. They certainly do seem to be doing a lot of things right.


----------



## JeffB (Apr 11, 2009)

I used to work at a business that used Ingram as a distr. for our products. I took  Ingram's orders for our product and then entered the Ingram orders into our sales database/order system so we could fulfill them. I was constantly on Ingram's site looking at these figures-Their numbers are beyond whacked. I would not trust any kind of numbers they supply based on what I've seen.


----------



## Treebore (Apr 11, 2009)

darjr said:


> Treebore, come on now. If you read the document it's clear they mean the first three books. They even state that those books were on their third printing. Then they start to talk about phb2.
> 
> Did you really just convince yourself that paizo and wotc sales are equivalent? Maybe someday. They certainly do seem to be doing a lot of things right.





I agree, the doubt comes from the fact that their "facts" have been proven to be misleading. IE not factual at all, but loose interpretation. They have spent years cultivating the perception that they had 6 Million customers, which in turns creates the perception that they are selling millions of books, especially the core 3.

So when your integrity is shown to be false, it calls your definition of everything into question, including print runs.  Are they saying 3 print runs because they are actually on their third print run, or is their "perception" that since they will be on their third print run at some day in the future, they can loosely interpret that to mean they can then say its in the third printing.

I agree that they shouldn't be lying, especially in court documents, but I have seen too many companies blatantly lie in court ever since ENRon for me to believe even things stated in court documents, especially since WOTC has clearly revealed that they have no problems creating false perceptions, for years.

So yes, WOTC should mean what their words seem to mean, but now that I know they engage in deceptive practices, it calls their integrity into question at all levels.

Lets just say I am now doubly glad I sold off my Hasbro stock when I did.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 11, 2009)

darjr said:


> Did you really just convince yourself that paizo and wotc sales are equivalent? Maybe someday. They certainly do seem to be doing a lot of things right.




Where in Treebore's post did he mention Paizo at all? 



			
				Hussar said:
			
		

> Y'know, I hear the chicken entrails work about as accurately as well.
> 
> Perhaps we should try tea leaves? Careful, might see a grim.
> 
> ...




So, when people speculate about WotC's sales, you dismiss them saying they don't _know _anything,and are only guessing, and when someone finds some actual numbers, flawed as the OP admits they are, you *STILL *dismiss them out of hand? 

I like the way you've rearranged the deck chairs on the _USS D&D_ there.


----------



## darjr (Apr 12, 2009)

Twowolves said:


> Where in Treebore's post did he mention Paizo at all?




Uh What? 



Treebore said:


> So if their "Core Books" do include pretty much their entire line, that would put WOTC sales much closer in line with Paizo sales.




Right there.


----------



## darjr (Apr 12, 2009)

Treebore said:


> I agree, the doubt comes from the fact that their "facts" have been proven to be misleading. IE not factual at all, but loose interpretation. They have spent years cultivating the perception that they had 6 Million customers, which in turns creates the perception that they are selling millions of books, especially the core 3.




Waitaminute. Are you saying that their facts in a court document can't be trusted, but yet you use them as facts to prove your own point?


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Apr 12, 2009)

Knight Otu said:


> Are you saying this is just sales numerology?




No, he's saying that nobody knows if 4e is doing well, because nobody has any hard numbers.

And if you happen to present any hard numbers, then you should just shut up.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2009)

darjr said:


> Waitaminute. Are you saying that their facts in a court document can't be trusted, but yet you use them as facts to prove your own point?




He's also citing their claim of "6 million D&D players world-wide" to support his claim that 4e is selling horribly (since it isn't reaching even 1/6 of that number).

Funny how their facts can't be trusted, unless they dovetail nicely with his preconceived notions.


----------



## Treebore (Apr 12, 2009)

darjr said:


> Waitaminute. Are you saying that their facts in a court document can't be trusted, but yet you use them as facts to prove your own point?





Uh, yeah. Its quit obvious that when they put we have "6 Million D&D fans World Wide" and then in the same document that they have only sold "hundreds of thousands of our core books" that one statement or the other is seriously misleading when they cannot both be true.

At least when they weren't saying that "over 35 Million people have played D&D" they didn't try to pass that off as their current fan base.


----------



## Truename (Apr 12, 2009)

I want to add my voice to the chorus: nobody knows how many books have been sold, not even WoTC. Let me explain.

WoTC knows how many books they have sold to bookstores. Sort of. Bookstores are allowed to return books that don't sell, so publishers make a guess (called a "reserve") about how many will be returned to them.

Okay, so WoTC doesn't know how many people have purchased books. They only know what they've sent to bookstores, and they've made a guess about how many of those will be returned.  What about the bookstores? Surely they know how many books they have sold?

Yes, they do (probably). But they're not telling. In order to tell how many books have actually been sold to customers, you'd have to call every bookseller on the planet (not just bookstores) and get their sales data.

Of course, that's impossible. But there _are_ companies that survey bookstores to try to garner that information. One of them is Bookscan, run by Nielsen, who also has those famous "Nielsen boxes" that track TV viewing. The Nielsen data will tell you how well your book is doing, _in typical bookstores_, _relative_ to other books. It won't tell you actual sales numbers, although Nielsen acts as though it does.

Let me illustrate. I'm the author of a fairly popular software development book. My most recent royalty statement is for Q4 '08. Here's what the various sources say about my sales in that quarter (I've rounded the numbers to maintain my anonymity):

Ingram: no data
Bookscan: ~650 sales
My royalty statement: ~3,700 sold to bookstores - ~700 reserve = ~3,000 minimum assumed to sell

As you can see, it's all a bunch of voodoo. The only people who have a clue as to how many books have been sold is WoTC, and even they don't know for sure.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 12, 2009)

darjr said:


> Uh What?
> 
> 
> 
> Right there.






LoL! So much for my speed reading skills. My bad! 

It probably would have helped if I'd "sped-read" the post he was quoting instead of the next one in line. So much for scanning a thread instead of reading every post!

Carry on...


----------



## Treebore (Apr 12, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> He's also citing their claim of "6 million D&D players world-wide" to support his claim that 4e is selling horribly (since it isn't reaching even 1/6 of that number).
> 
> Funny how their facts can't be trusted, unless they dovetail nicely with his preconceived notions.




My preconceived notions? At least I am going by comparison of hard numbers. Whats your proof I have only notions? Nothing but your opinion.

Anyone who can understand numbers can see that there is a HUGE difference between "6 Million" and hundreds of thousands. That the perception given by having 6 Million fans but the fact that only a few hundred thousand sales is vastly different.

IF you want to ignore this huge discrepancy that is your choice, but don't act like the difference is just a "notion".


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2009)

Treebore said:


> Its quit obvious that when they put we have "6 Million D&D fans World Wide" and then in the same document that they have only sold "hundreds of thousands of our core books" that one statement or the other is seriously misleading when they cannot both be true.




Their latest research into the industry indicated that 6 million people around the world claim to be D&D players. You are jumping immediately to the assumption that "D&D player" automatically means "4th Edition D&D player" when there is no evidence to support this claim, and ample evidence from previous surveys which came up with millions of D&D players worldwide that it applies to all editions to D&D, past and present.

You seem completely fixated on "WotC is lying" and seem to be willing to spin any kind of statements or data to support that belief, regardless of whether the facts actually support you or not.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2009)

Treebore said:


> At least I am going by comparison of hard numbers.




Numbers that you alternately claim are outright lies or hard facts. You're waffling like a house of pancakes.



> Whats your proof I have only notions?




Because you have no evidence. Without evidence, all your claims are unsupported. It's even worse when you cite "evidence" that you claim is unreliable or false. Using figures you claim are untrustworthy to support your claims gives you zero credibility.



> Anyone who can understand numbers can see that there is a HUGE difference between "6 Million" and hundreds of thousands.




And anyone who can understand that the "6 million" number is one given for D&D players of ALL editions, not just the current, would know that you're ignoring facts merely to suit the claim you are making.


----------



## Mark (Apr 12, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> Because you have no evidence. Without evidence, all your claims are unsupported.





What evidence supports the idea that ceasing to sell OOP product PDFs will support FLGSs?


----------



## Treebore (Apr 12, 2009)

Truename said:


> As you can see, it's all a bunch of voodoo. The only people who have a clue as to how many books have been sold is WoTC, and even they don't know for sure.





Agreed, which is why they only said "hundreds of thousands sold" instead of "386,478 sold". They may not have given a exact number, but they did give a solid "ball park" range, which is certainly below 1 million, total. When you take into account there are at elast 3 books in the "core" then you can get even closer by dividing 999,999 by 3, and know that the books sales are no higher than 333,333 for each of them.

You can then estimate even better numbers by using excepted ratios of 6 players to every DM, or 3 to 1, and from there you can come up with very solid estimates of how many DMGs, PH's, and MM's have sold.

No matter which numbers come up, they certainly didn't serve a customer base of 6 Million fans. At most 2 Million, more than likely there are less than 1 million players of 4E. Most likely right around 500,000.

So people can call my estimates assumptions or notions, but WOTC is still the one who tried to push the perception that they had 6 million D&D fans when they clearly know they do not. Certainly not for their 4th edition, but I guess people defending WOTC shows that their marketed perceptions are bought into, no matter how clearly their newly revealed numbers prove otherwise.


----------



## Treebore (Apr 12, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> Numbers that you alternately claim are outright lies or hard facts. You're waffling like a house of pancakes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Wow, you really don't like numbers and logic, do you? Go ahead, believe what you want, twist things how you wish. The facts are the facts.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2009)

Mark said:


> What evidence supports the idea that ceasing to sell OOP product PDFs will support FLGSs?




Maybe you should ask me this in the thread where we are discussing brick-and-mortar stores, rather than in this one where we aren't discussing that.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2009)

Treebore said:


> Wow, you really don't like numbers and logic, do you?




I love both, which is why I became a programmer when I was younger.

However, I fail to see any logic applied when you, in the same breath, claim their numbers are not to be trusted and use those numbers as support for what you are claiming.


----------



## phloog (Apr 12, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> And anyone who can understand that the "6 million" number is one given for D&D players of ALL editions, not just the current, would know that you're ignoring facts merely to suit the claim you are making.




But isn't kind of the point that the six million statement isn't really aimed at people who can 'understand that...is one given for D&D players of ALL editions'...but at people who will likely make the assumption that 6M "fans" is 6M customers of whatever they're putting out NOW?  

It's part marketing spin - "Our fan base is HUGE", and quite possibly a deliberate obfuscation on their part to inflate the perception of stolen business.

Sure, WE on these forums probably know that players span editions, but when WOTC goes to court and begins to try to receive damages, and when these damages must surely have to be based on some estimate of the POTENTIAL lost sales, it becomes "legally truthful, but not helpful" to speak of 6M "fans", and then if a judge or jury doesn't ever find out it crosses editions, no biggie.  

Those who hear the statement and aren't familiar with D&D might think "Wow...they might have sold 6M of those new handbooks, but now there are all these illegal pdfs going around so they've only sold a hundred thousand" - - instead of the likely more accurate "Lots of people play this game, but a HUGE number still play versions that have no need for this book, so they aren't lost sales".


----------



## Mark (Apr 12, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> Maybe you should ask me this in the thread where we are discussing brick-and-mortar stores, rather than in this one where we aren't discussing that.





I just realized that you were Mourn.  Please disregard my posts.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2009)

Mark said:


> I just realized that you were Mourn.  Please disregard my posts.




I'm not sure what to make of this. Is this a dismissal simply based on who I am, or is this a dismissal of the discussion in this topic as you didn't realize that I was the same poster you were engaging in the other thread?


----------



## Mark (Apr 12, 2009)

The Little Raven said:


> I'm not sure what to make of this. Is this a dismissal simply based on who I am, or is this a dismissal of the discussion in this topic as you didn't realize that I was the same poster you were engaging in the other thread?





My apologies.  I was mistaken to engage you and withdraw any objection to your posts.


----------

