Comprehensive Analysis of SCG Attendance

[lordofthepit]

I've been working hard to compile data regarding SCG attendance numbers and to share them in a presentable manner. My goals are two-fold:

1. to provide the evidence to comfort players who fear that Legacy may be waning in popularity
2. to convince the organizers at SCG to better support the Legacy format, as I believe the evidence shows that such an arrangement would beneficial for them as well as for our community

Please provide feedback, especially if any section of this writing or data remains unclear!

http://lordofthepit23.blogspot.com/2...is-of-scg.html

[lyracian]

An interesting read however I am not convinced that one Legacy 20k is enough data points to convince anyone (let along SCG) that the new format is a failure. One of the reasons they gave for changing the format was that 10 round (and then another three for top 8) events were taking too long on a single day. Part of the question though is whether the road show is intended to make a profit or if it is just be a sales tool for buying and selling of cards? If card sales is the aim then I would think Standard players are the primary customer they are looking for.

[Lemnear]

Fascinating. I have to work through this at a given time. Thanks for the work

[H]

Since I heard SCG may be making a big announcement soon, I rushed to get this written (and perhaps I am delusional about how convincing my argument may be or how wide my audience might spread).

Well, they just announced GP London will be put on by SSCG in August. Not sure if that counts as "big" though.

Have to really read the article when I have a bit more time, but thanks for the hard work you put in to it.

[btm10]

This is a really great post, thanks for doing all of that work!

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

[Barook]

This is a really great post, thanks for doing all of that work!

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

They probably only announced the first half of 2015 for this very reason.

It was a risky venture, and while we don't have enough data points yet, it looks like it's a change for the worse for them. Many people simply don't have the time to play up to two days, which hurts attendance.

I wouldn't be suprised if things would go back to normal in the second half of 2015.

[ESG]

Great analysis. When we have access to more data, this will get even more illuminating.

That begs the question: if SCG attendance for its Legacy events is at least comparable to that for its Modern events, which is in turn comparable to that of Standard events, then why is there such a lopsided distribution of $20K Opens in favor of more Standard events?

Let's consider this scenario: Because WOTC wants it that way, and SCG is sensitive to WOTC's desires (Khans names are a perfect example). Even if the evidence was clearer that Legacy and Modern tournaments make SCG more money, SCG derives a lot of value from its relationship with WOTC. WOTC favors Standard due to the format moving more product. SCG probably could scale back Standard, but I doubt we would ever see SCG drastically cut back Standard, even if the tournament-figures disparity were quite a bit larger than it is now.

[nedleeds]

Good article, lots of work. It occupied my morning of bagel, coffee, coffee, coffee. I'm still not sure about the whole sunday coverage drove legacy or somehow expanded the player base argument. a) the casual audience that was going to watch whatever was streaming on Sunday had to go and actually buy legacy cards and come out and play in their local weeklies. It's impossible to determine what effect if any the stream had on overall legacy adoption, it's absolutely not the case in Atlanta which has seen it's legacy weekly dwindle from 30+ 5-6 years ago to now not firing and being dropped for standard. b) existing eternal players I know would occasionally tune in while doing other things only to see the same brainstorm, delver, SFM circle jerk and quickly tune out ... confirming their belief that legacy is / was stale as a day old fart.

As stated above, if the whole circuit is a vehicle to fuel buying inventory we'll never really know how 'successful' it is. Indianapolis next week should be an interesting data point, we were geared up for a roadtrip if something changed with legacy but the bnr announcement was met with a resounding meh.

[lordofthepit]

An interesting read however I am not convinced that one Legacy 20k is enough data points to convince anyone (let along SCG) that the new format is a failure. One of the reasons they gave for changing the format was that 10 round (and then another three for top 8) events were taking too long on a single day. Part of the question though is whether the road show is intended to make a profit or if it is just be a sales tool for buying and selling of cards? If card sales is the aim then I would think Standard players are the primary customer they are looking for.

I think it's mostly a sales tool, but I don't think the two-day events are actually successful in that regard:

1) Interest in Standard overall from their customers would have been strong with weekly one-day Standard Opens or even with no coverage, as it's already heavily promoted by Wizards and it's the gateway format that pretty much all new players are exposed to anyway. Oversaturating the Standard player base with two days of coverage each weekend is unlikely to compel them to buy more staples much more than one day of coverage would have done anyway.
2) The presence of a two-day Open is less likely to facilitate card sales or purchases than the old system. A player who enters the convention center with the additional intent of doing business with SCG is unlikely to be affected by the structure of the tournament, and in fact, if it's causing fewer players to enter the convention center, it likely detracts from the number of potential player-customers.

On another note, Washington, D.C., pulled just 508 players for its two-day Standard event (and I'll update the blog with figures periodically). There is no trend of this lukewarm reception for the $20K two-days reversing anytime soon.

[Fatal]

Maybe I'm wrong - but I see correlation between "healthy of Legacy" (basically printing TNN and TC / DTT) and number of Players on each Event - correlation is very clear from date to date.

[Barook]

On another note, Washington, D.C., pulled just 508 players for its two-day Standard event (and I'll update the blog with figures periodically). There is no trend of this lukewarm reception for the $20K two-days reversing anytime soon.

Modern has 165 players and Legacy 163 players. How does that compare to the data before?

[lordofthepit]

Modern has 165 players and Legacy 163 players. How does that compare to the data before?

I'll have a more thorough update sometime in a few days (long tournament today, probably working late and playing some Magic tomorrow), but that's about what I expected. I thought Legacy and Modern would have roughly similar attendance unless they took place in a city that had a particularly strong preference for one format over the other (Portland and Columbus representing the extremes).

To be honest, I thought there was a very real possibility that Modern attendance might have taken a substantial hit because players might have been really pissed off about the new B&R update, but I guess not everyone is as upset about the banning of Birthing Pod as I was.

[Dragonslayer_90]

To be honest, I thought there was a very real possibility that Modern attendance might have taken a substantial hit because players might have been really pissed off about the new B&R update, but I guess not everyone is as upset about the banning of Birthing Pod as I was.

I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people in the Modern community itself were upset with the banning of Birthing Pod. I know many people who quit because of it. However, there is also a significant segment of the modern community who, while kind of sad to see pod go, also expected it to happen and just accepted it. In other words this periodic banning of the best cards has become a kind of cultural norm/ expectation in the modern community. This is another reason I've sworn off modern at this point until a huge change in the direction of the format happens because I want no part in an non-rotating format where people just blindly accept an unhealthy practice that's only going to kill the format eventually. It's not only because I'm a die hard legacy player that I vehemently reject how Wizards is managing the format. I reject liberal use of bannings for a non-rotating format in a trading card game on principle.

[lordofthepit]

I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people in the Modern community itself were upset with the banning of Birthing Pod. I know many people who quit because of it. However, there is also a significant segment of the modern community who, while kind of sad to see pod go, also expected it to happen and just accepted it. In other words this periodic banning of the best cards has become a kind of cultural norm/ expectation in the modern community. This is another reason I've sworn off modern at this point until a huge change in the direction of the format happens because I want no part in an non-rotating format where people just blindly accept an unhealthy practice that's only going to kill the format eventually. It's not only because I'm a die hard legacy player that I vehemently reject how Wizards is managing the format. I reject liberal use of bannings for a non-rotating format in a trading card game on principle.

Some local players informed me that there is a Modern format Pro Tour coming up, in addition to a Modern format Grand Prix. I'm not sure how much this provides players who were on the fence an incentive to play Modern for practice, but I suppose it could offset any detrimental effects to the Modern player base from the Pod banning. I guess we'll get more data eventually.

[phazonmutant]

This is a really great post, thanks for doing all of that work!

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

Pretty sure the point isn't to make money on the tournaments or sell cards on-site, the point of a tournament for a store is to buy cards. Usually stores are happy if they break even on renting the convention center and paying staff. Starcitygames does a huge volume of sales, which is enabled by buying lots of cards at 50-70% retail price. That's where the real money is.

Let's consider this scenario: Because WOTC wants it that way, and SCG is sensitive to WOTC's desires (Khans names are a perfect example). Even if the evidence was clearer that Legacy and Modern tournaments make SCG more money, SCG derives a lot of value from its relationship with WOTC. WOTC favors Standard due to the format moving more product. SCG probably could scale back Standard, but I doubt we would ever see SCG drastically cut back Standard, even if the tournament-figures disparity were quite a bit larger than it is now.

That doesn't seem realistic. I'm sure they have a good relationship with Wizards, and they may even get special treatment with information or prices, but I'm dubious about any conspiracy theories that SCG bends to Wizards' will. They're a business, and they'll do what they perceive to be most profitable. Standard drives the majority of sales, and Legacy probably has high enough margins that it's worth supporting as much or more than Modern.

[Ellomdian]

Well, they just announced GP London will be put on by SCG in August. Not sure if that counts as "big" though.

And GP Seville is *secretly* being put on by Cascade, a close CFB partner. WotC may have decided that they like the way shows are run by the big TO's in the states, and they are exporting that experience.

I'm surprised that they've lost money on the 20K Opens this year. Unless they're making a ton of money from their dealer booth and from subletting space to other dealers and alterists I can't imagine them keeping the 20K Opens going much longer.

It's been discussed (but never confirmed) that the primary goals of the Open series are Marketing and Acquisition, not just to run a profitable event. Most speculation also discounts the absurd profit that side events are run at - I've worked GP's where the event space is literally just paid for out of Draft profits.

The presence of a two-day Open is less likely to facilitate card sales or purchases than the old system...
On another note, Washington, D.C., pulled just 508 players for its two-day Standard event (and I'll update the blog with figures periodically). There is no trend of this lukewarm reception for the $20K two-days reversing anytime soon.

1. Large vendors typically show up to GP's and Opens to buy, not sell. It's been this way for half a decade, and it's pretty well known. Given the logistics involved in large-scale singles selling, one of the biggest reasons to bring inventory out is to get even more cash on hand to facilitate buying.

2. SCG Indy and Columbus 2014 (also in January, and on the East Coast) had 567 and 688 players (respectively) for Standard. DC's attendance was almost certainly impacted by fears of the weather coming in early. I wouldn't necessarily jump to conclusions about events that show expected attendance historically.

TL;DR - your numbers are awesome, but I would be careful about drawing conclusions off of a small set of data. Also, the 2-day system was implemented to prevent logistical problems at events where they expected large turnout (see what happens when we get to May and June) and it conveniently works even at the smaller events.

Side Note: 2 Lands decks in the T8. Neat...

[Barook]

That doesn't seem realistic. I'm sure they have a good relationship with Wizards, and they may even get special treatment with information or prices, but I'm dubious about any conspiracy theories that SCG bends to Wizards' will. They're a business, and they'll do what they perceive to be most profitable. Standard drives the majority of sales, and Legacy probably has high enough margins that it's worth supporting as much or more than Modern.

Then what about the Khans names for established Legacy decks? The vast majority of people find them inconsistent, confusing and downright irritating, yet they won't back up from them for no appearent reason. They also won't apply Ravnica guild names to two-colored decks due how dumb it would be. There's absolutely no point in concealing easy to read information like RUG or BUG in shitty Khans names, other than Wizards shitty marketing strategies.

[Esper3k]

An interesting read - thanks for all the work and effort you put into this!

[phazonmutant]

Then what about the Khans names for established Legacy decks? The vast majority of people find them inconsistent, confusing and downright irritating, yet they won't back up from them for no appearent reason. They also won't apply Ravnica guild names to two-colored decks due how dumb it would be. There's absolutely no point in concealing easy to read information like RUG or BUG in shitty Khans names, other than Wizards shitty marketing strategies.

That's contradicted by published statements by Cedric. They believe that the vast majority of people don't find them confusing, because the vast majority of people are newer / standard players. They're trying to make the names less confusing and more accessible by using the wedge names. It's only to crufty old-timers like us that things like Junk and Raka mean anything, and the new names (which are common in standard right now) are confusing.

[nedleeds]

Not one person has quit or been inspired to play legacy by the difference in calling a deck BUG derp vs Sultai derp. Stop it, really. They have to use those names for the standard coverage because the cards say <TRIBE> Charm and <TRIBE> Ascendancy and <TRIBE> Monkey Raping War Monger asking them to bounce back and forth in coverage is absurd. It's tough enough to bounce back and forth between formats and not get other shit wrong like how Trinisphere works or how Sylvan Library works don't burden the crew with having to jump back and forth between two names for the color pie. Do I think the names are stupid? Sure. Would I prefer if everything used the original legends elder dragons and the volvers. Of course. But it's not going to happen.