70 replies to this topic

[Joe Kutz]

The 2000 Wizards survey was 2-6 million gamers. I went with the lower.

The number is irrelevant - percentages are relevant. They used the percentage to compare it to US residents between the ages of 10 and 35 in 2000. There are more people in the US and there are a lot more people outside the 12-35 range who play wargames and RPGs. However WotC doesn't care about the customers who are older than 35 - it isn't their target audience.

The general percentage should hold true in a larger population sample with similar values and principles (most of the EU, Canada and Australia). Extending it out to include the older population might be a stretch - but I don't think it is really much of a stretch. The D&D is almost as old as the cut-off that Wizards uses in there surveys - and wargames have a much older tradition.

Scott Rouse quote gives 6 million players as slightly inflated. Also notes that a large number of those are essentially "non-paying" customers, or by my parlance not lifestyle gamers and not likely to assemble a mini collection.

"D&D had about six million players worldwide last year, according to a survey by Wizards, though Rouse said the figure may be somewhat inflated."

Not sure what you might know about that survey...but it wasn't a survey. It was the total sales numbers for the D&D 3.x PHBs. The reason they called it as may be slightly inflated - was that it included sales of both the D&D 3 and 3.5 PHBs, and some people might have purchased both books. However you also have players who don't buy any of the books at all. It isn't really an accurate source of market data like the survey they performed in 2000. It also doesn't include any other game system or older versions of D&D.

35 years at under $30 million per year plus miniature sales.

"It's big business: by one estimate, some 20 million people have played Dungeons & Dragons, and the books and related materials have racked up $1 billion in sales."

Dungeons and Dragons - not RPGs, not Wargames...just Dungeons and Dragons. While it is the most popular RPG - it is not the only one by any means.

24,000,000 gamers spending an average of $1.25 each per year?

No - not what the article says. The sales numbers which are mentioned by Pramas are based on the Gaming Reports numbers. They divide miniature sales, RPGs and CCGs into seperate groups of the hobby game industry. Miniature sales generally account for 3 to 4 times the sales of strictly RPG products (the books) depending on the year. In the article I link to below, they pegged the North American miniature market at $200 million - NORTH AMERICA. Of the RPG market, WotC had about 43% of that market in North America...but with the 6 million some odd number that they toss around that means there are a lot of other gamers which are not accounted for by any number which is based on D&D sales or WotC hype.

State of the Industry 2004: Been Down So Long It Looks Like Up To Me

Not a lot for a 24,000,000 TTRPGer population.

Ummm...what? D&D, wargames and miniatures has never done much advertising. Advertising doesn't effect the number of gamers...and by the way, D&D isn't the only game in town.

Recent circulation for Dungeon flunctuated between 23,000 and 48,000. Dragon Magazine has had circulation between 31,000 and 68,000 this decade.
The invested RPG miniature gamer number was pegged to this at 60,000.

I don't get it? What method do you use to make your conclusions? What effect does Dragon magazine have on miniature sales? Are they related at all? Not really.

According to the survey linked to below (only public one which I am aware of)...using only the numbers which they provide and not extrapolating to the general population (only dealing with their target audience). There were 2.25 million monthly players of which half used miniatures. Are monthly gamers who use miniatures not invested? I canceled my subscription for Dragon once it became an advertisement for WotC - I am sure I am not the only one. Again though, people who are not interested in D&D 3.x would have little interest in the current Dragon or Dungeon magazines (while they still existed).

I think the 3% of the population number is suspect. What is the public reference on that?

Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0

...A two phase approach was used to determine information about trading card games (TCGs), role playing games (RPGs) and miniatures wargames (MWG) in the general US population between the ages of 12 and 35...

The study provides the following information about the basic demographics of the tabletop RPG marketplace:

Size: 6% play or have played TRPGs (~ 5.5 million people)
3% play monthly (~ 2.25 million people)
Crossover: 17% of the total play MWGs monthly

The study provides the following information about the basic demographics of the MWG marketplace:

Size: 4% play or have played MWGs (~3.7 million people)
2% play monthly (~1.8 million people)

That is what I use to provide the monthly RPG numbers, the monthly wargaming numbers and to account for the crossover between the two groups. The numbers which are given behind the percentage do not take into account anyone over the age of 35 or anyone outside of the US. They are not WotC target audience. However the percentages do tend to follow across and outside of the target group for WotC.

Now even if we were to cut my general population in half to focus in on the 12-35 demographic - you would still end up with half a billion miniatures in play and 12,410,000 gamers using them. In terms of sales figures - I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that the rest of the world buys as many miniatures as North America does (there are 4.5 billion potential customers after all...).

[Joe Kutz]

I think you missed my point on that one Joe.

Rereading your post I see what you are saying. Not sure on the methods of their survey or the age of it though - so it is hard to say for certain on the numbers (still seem a bit low not including Flames of War). While it might be accurate for people buying new armies, I would guess it still doesn't account for people who are expanding one or two at a time (just a few more tanks...maybe a stand or two of archers...that chariot looks cool).

[Heisler]

I think you missed my point on that one Joe.

Rereading your post I see what you are saying. Not sure on the methods of their survey or the age of it though - so it is hard to say for certain on the numbers (still seem a bit low not including Flames of War). While it might be accurate for people buying new armies, I would guess it still doesn't account for people who are expanding one or two at a time (just a few more tanks...maybe a stand or two of archers...that chariot looks cool).

You are exactly right, it didn't include those that were enlarging or expanding existing units in their armies. The data is old at this point and probably not valid anymore.

[ReaperClark]

Just as an FYI...

We are about to reorder the plastic Orcs and Skellies again (for the third time) as we are running out ,and in fact, have run out of orc with sword. I do not have a single "orc with sword" left. I think someone is buying them!

Reaper; doing it's part to fill up the imaginary saturation point.

6 billion people making a new baby or two every second makes it hard to hit any sort of saturation point, don't you think?

As far as saturation points go, here is what really happens. If we make a model that does well, and then make one just like it, we split the sales between the two, so there is no point in making the second one until the first one is NICed... no longer in the catalog.

If we make a single piece model and make almost the exact same thing in multi parts, the single piece model sells better so we try to limit the number of piece as much as possible.

Some models we know up front won't do very well, but we need to make that creature to have it in the line for those folks that want it. However, they basically all sell a minimum amount to make them worth producing.

I am getting better and better at guessing the ordering habits of the general gaming population. I guessed the initial release numbers for Chronoscope within 10 models of the total sold! That was without any market research of any kind; just my best guess. My next prediction is that they will rapidly be reordered by distribution as they will sell out quickly.

[kristof65]

The number is irrelevant - percentages are relevant. They used the percentage to compare it to US residents between the ages of 10 and 35 in 2000. There are more people in the US and there are a lot more people outside the 12-35 range who play wargames and RPGs. However WotC doesn't care about the customers who are older than 35 - it isn't their target audience.

The general percentage should hold true in a larger population sample with similar values and principles (most of the EU, Canada and Australia). Extending it out to include the older population might be a stretch - but I don't think it is really much of a stretch. The D&D is almost as old as the cut-off that Wizards uses in there surveys - and wargames have a much older tradition.

emphasis added by me
I don't think it's a stretch at all. I have no numbers, but anecdotally, I've been gaming with people outside that age range for a long time. No one I currently game with is under 30 (about 12 people total), and at least half of us are over 35, some of us more so than we'd like to admit. The cons I attend all have significant numbers of attendees in the 50+ category, and a significantly high percentage of people between 30 and 50.

Again, anecdotal, but something I've witnessed is that most people who are still gaming by the time they're 35 continue to game, and are more "dedicated" (for lack of a better term) to gaming. Most of the people I've seen "drop out" of gaming in my own gaming circles were all under 35, most under 30.

[kristof65]

As far as saturation points go, here is what really happens. If we make a model that does well, and then make one just like it, we split the sales between the two, so there is no point in making the second one until the first one is NICed... no longer in the catalog.

Makes sense, but a little clarification here. What exactly do you mean by "then make one just like it?" Do you mean like the fact you're using older DHL sculpts for the LE line? Or are you refering to something like having multiple variations of say Orc w/ Sword?

I am getting better and better at guessing the ordering habits of the general gaming population. I guessed the initial release numbers for Chronoscope within 10 models of the total sold! That was without any market research of any kind; just my best guess. My next prediction is that they will rapidly be reordered by distribution as they will sell out quickly.

So, are you pushing to have a sales number betting pool for new releases? Or did they do away with it already cause you got too good?

[Joe Kutz]

Makes sense, but a little clarification here. What exactly do you mean by "then make one just like it?" Do you mean like the fact you're using older DHL sculpts for the LE line? Or are you referring to something like having multiple variations of say Orc w/ Sword?

Mostly seems to happen with more specific sculpts than orc with sword. If you take a look at their "catalog" miniatures versus their direct order miniatures - you will often see there are several character miniatures which have a similar concept (from time to time they appear to be the same character). However the new figure has a different pose or is perhaps a better equipped character.

emphasis added by me

I think the emphasis is appropriate. By Wizards own admittance, over half the people who started playing D&D 3.x are no longer playing it anymore. WotC though is after something different (something which I don't think they can get at...). They want the fat kid who plays the PS3 everyday. It is easier to sell to them than it is to sell to others. By recycling the rules every couple years, they can take better control over the small resale market of the books. By using this sales strategy, they can be certain that when the fat kid gets bored with the archaic PnP games and goes back to killing hookers in the streets of Liberty City...they don't have to worry about him selling his books to the next door neighbor.

Wizards problem with us old farts is we like the games we play and are not normally impressed with the shiny new stuff. They actually have to work a bit harder to provide content in order to get our dollars. As opposed to reformatting the same rules...again...they might have to use a creative team (or one hell of a guy) to produce a product which enhances the games we enjoy playing - that costs more, takes more time and ultimately is more risky...plus they can't charge a monthly fee (did away with Dragon and Dungeon magazines and are replacing them with something which costs more than both of them together and you don't actually get anything tangible for when in a years time WotC hack that bit out due to lost profits).

[kristof65]

[quote][quote]Makes sense, but a little clarification here. What exactly do you mean by "then make one just like it?" Do you mean like the fact you're using older DHL sculpts for the LE line? Or are you referring to something like having multiple variations of say Orc w/ Sword?[/quote]

Mostly seems to happen with more specific sculpts than orc with sword. If you take a look at their "catalog" miniatures versus their direct order miniatures - you will often see there are several character miniatures which have a similar concept (from time to time they appear to be the same character). However the new figure has a different pose or is perhaps a better equipped character.[/quote]

That's pretty much what I'm figuring, too, just looking for validation of my assumption.


[quote]I think the emphasis is appropriate. By Wizards own admittance, over half the people who started playing D&D 3.x are no longer playing it anymore.<snip>[/quote]
As not to derail the thread, I responded to this in this thread here:
http://www.reapermin...showtopic=32541[quote name='Joe Kutz' date='Jun 3 2008, 09:58 AM' post='477135']

[joshuaslater]

Well all the number crunching is lost on me. I predicted Reaper's slow release into this market would be the best way to go for a company that was all pewter and now offering plastics. They've really come through in a non-blind format. My hats off to them.

I think I will buy some.

[JodyJ]

The 2000 Wizards survey was 2-6 million gamers. I went with the lower.

The number is irrelevant - percentages are relevant.

Sure until you make the jump from 3% of US 12-35 year olds in 2000 to applying it to the EU and entire English speaking population.

There are more people in the US and there are a lot more people outside the 12-35 range who play wargames and RPGs. However WotC doesn't care about the customers who are older than 35 - it isn't their target audience.

Their current releases seem pretty spot on for the 36+ gamers that I know. BTW most of the current gamers were in the 12-35 demographic 8 years ago. Even yourself, the 'old fogey' that you are. Let your WotC-hate Flag fly.

Not sure what you might know about that survey...but it wasn't a survey. It was the total sales numbers for the D&D 3.x PHBs.

Doubtful, but I find it interesting that the print run of 4e was 50% larger than 1st printing of 3.5e yet they sold out last week (of course these still have to clear the channel).
If 6 million was the combined sales number of 3.x books, where does that peg the number of 4e books moved in the last 2 weeks or so? Reaper should hope they buy your average of 6 minis each in the next 12 months (a number higher than the outdated but probably not outlandishly off 11 year DHL total).

According to the survey linked to below (only public one which I am aware of)...using only the numbers which they provide and not extrapolating to the general population (only dealing with their target audience). There were 2.25 million monthly players of which half used miniatures. Are monthly gamers who use miniatures not invested?

Ryan's survey was a WotC survey. So WotC under Dancey was truthful, and WotC with Charles Ryan and Scott Rouse is a lying sack of suits.

And regarding half the players using minis that's 1.125 million monthly players using minis. Divided into groups (division by 6 per your earlier math), then there are 200,000 groups using minis in the survey population (since if one person in the group is using minis the survey will likely record them as all using minis). What percentage of those have their 6 character figs and a handful of proxies? Which have collections of over 1,000 figures? 60,000 of those seems like a reasonable number to assume have large and wide miniature collections for TTRPG which was my reasoning in the other forum and which oddly enough coincides with my best 'guess' for cases per DDM set sold (since that's how a normal break-up and reform group of RPGers can accumulate those kind of collections) and also is in the same rough size as the annual Dragon and Dungeon subscription numbers.

And my point is that saturation is 'possible', since I have a hard time with the 'we've been making minis for 35 years and still haven't saturated the market' argument for predicting future possibilities.

I'll be waiting to see your 2009 survey posted so I can help you surpass your 2008 numbers (Try not to bury it in the Off-topic/General forum next time). The 2007 and 2008 surveys looked very one sided just based on where it was advertised (don't make too many assumptions on whether people prefer to paint or just play when the survey was only solicited on die-hard painting sites).

[ReaperClark]

Makes sense, but a little clarification here. What exactly do you mean by "then make one just like it?" Do you mean like the fact you're using older DHL sculpts for the LE line? Or are you referring to something like having multiple variations of say Orc w/ Sword?

Having two versions of orc with sword would simply split the sales, until the first orc with sword slows down enough to be removed from the catalog and then a new one introduced to replace it. The relationship between the lines seems to be irrelevant.

I think we could release a similar looking orc with sword into Warlord, Dark Heaven and in LE all in the same month and they would all sell as expected, but the moment 2 similar orcs with swords appears in one line, the sales would split between them. The exception would be if one orc was really, really cool, then the sales would not split, one would just not sell, or if we tried putting the exact same orc in Warlord and DHL. Then I think it might be a problem. The fact that DHL and/or Warlord have the exact same orc as LE would be irrelevant as well. As witnessed by the minotaur, which appears in both DHL and LE and performs as expect in their perspective lines.

[JodyJ]

Disclaimer: I enjoy Reaper figs. There are many I want to buy. If anything I'd like to see you good folks crank out new sculpts faster. Miniature collectors around the world would find it a grave loss if you went out of business.

Just as an FYI...

We are about to reorder the plastic Orcs and Skellies again (for the third time) as we are running out ,and in fact, have run out of orc with sword. I do not have a single "orc with sword" left. I think someone is buying them!

Doesn't this go against your 'we always have them when you want them' marketing line?

Personally rather than tying up a factory on yet another reprint I'd really like to see them working on the gnolls and kobolds.

Reaper; doing it's part to fill up the imaginary saturation point.

You go girl!! And gents!

6 billion people making a new baby or two every second makes it hard to hit any sort of saturation point, don't you think?

Long as your selling in India and the developing world. Most of the current English speaking market is at stagnant or declining population growth. The major emergent market of China is in a worse position.

As far as saturation points go, here is what really happens. If we make a model that does well, and then make one just like it, we split the sales between the two, so there is no point in making the second one until the first one is NICed... no longer in the catalog.

If we make a single piece model and make almost the exact same thing in multi parts, the single piece model sells better so we try to limit the number of piece as much as possible.

Some models we know up front won't do very well, but we need to make that creature to have it in the line for those folks that want it. However, they basically all sell a minimum amount to make them worth producing.

I am getting better and better at guessing the ordering habits of the general gaming population. I guessed the initial release numbers for Chronoscope within 10 models of the total sold! That was without any market research of any kind; just my best guess. My next prediction is that they will rapidly be reordered by distribution as they will sell out quickly.

Good stuff. Looks like my awkward and lunatic plan to draw some market tidbits out of you has paid off.

Pretty much makes it worth de-lurking for this thread. BTW, good to be here.

[Dragon Snack]

What I find most interesting is that people assume that Reaper cares what WotC does or does not do, or that we are trying to "compete" in some manner with them.

While some may assume it, I think it's more that people want you to. They would rather have a reasonably priced Reaper mini than have to either search out an overpriced WotC "rare" or spend the time and money trying to find it in blind packaging.

I think it would be fun to try a collectable metal line, just to see how well it does.

Don't even think about it...

They are cheap toys, not display pieces.

Hate to say it, but their Beholder sits on my computer desk. My well painted Reaper minis sit on the windowsill by my painting desk. I've seen people who have the Icon Dragons displayed at their house as well (although 'cheap' doesn't really describe those).

But, I'm game, how should it be done?

Find an investor who will underwrite the plastic line so you can release a large batch. Hey, you asked...

As we move forward, many companies come and go, but we are still here. Something is going right.

Amen. While I'm disagreeing with some of your points in this particular post, I've made the point myself (on other boards) that you aren't really competing with WotC with this line and that you know what you're doing even if I personally wish you were choosing other minis to release as LEs.

Working from an average of 8,000,000 figures released into the wild per set...

I think you are really high with this number. Back during Harbinger WotC made a big deal about selling a million minis. They've been silent since then. I sometimes wonder how successful DDMs really are.

Depends on what you mean by really high. Off by a factor of 2? Maybe. That doesn't change my point much.

Off by a factor of 10? I don't think they'd still be making them. After all, that was part of Clark's point-- Reaper can operate at selling 10,000s of individual figures. WotC and Hasbro are only happy with 100,000s to millions of boosters.

The announcement was that they sold 1,000,000 in 4 weeks as the 'new' kid in the pre-painted plastic market - that was why they made the announcement. Just to say, "Hey, these are selling." After that they didn't need to toot the DDM horn. They've consistently sold out of every set within 15 months or so and reprinted at least 3 sets.

The point is, nobody knows except for WotC - and they aren't saying anything...

As others have pointed out, making up numbers doesn't really get us anywhere. Even your post at MaxMinis only claimed 1 million DDMs a set (a number I'm more inclined to believe). Your 8 million a set was for the first 4 sets (and you were assuming they started out selling as well as Mage Knight started). You also note at MaxMinis that 10 sets are still available, but you claim here that they consistently sell out after 15 months - do you have new info?

Simply put, while I'm sure DDM sells well (or WotC would have pulled the plug already), there are reasons beyond sales that they could be less successful and still be around. They often use DDMs to promote products from the RPG side (remember the Wrackspawn?).

It's a great selling product, but let's not go crazy...

[Joe Kutz]

The 2000 Wizards survey was 2-6 million gamers. I went with the lower.

You went with the lower...and then applied it to Worldwide as opposed to US only which is what the survey's numbers actually apply to. The percentage could potentially apply worldwide, and it is likely to apply to areas of the world which are similar demographically to the US. If you want to expand the numbers to the world wide population, you will need to use the percentage - not the 2-6 million gamers. If your premises stated in the other forum were targeted only to the US, than the number could be considered relevant...however you attempted to extrapolate them to a world wide summary, for that you need to use a percentage.

Let your WotC-hate Flag fly.

It has nothing to do with my opinions of WotC, nor does it change my analysis of the numbers. WotC target audience is between 12 and 35. It is a statement of fact, not opinion.

Doubtful, but I find it interesting that the print run of 4e was 50% larger than 1st printing of 3.5e yet they sold out last week (of course these still have to clear the channel).

Not really useful until the stores start to reorder the 4e books (something which I would guess will take some time). Being larger than 3.5 by 50% doesn't really mean much since my understanding as that there were more D&D 3 books sold than there were 3.5 books and if I recall 3.5 was reprinted a few times. Without WotC releasing actual numbers for the print runs - there really isn't anything to be learned from the statement. For all we know it could only be 100,000 books - I doubt it is larger than 500,000 books (that is considered a huge run by books which get picked up by Oprah or similar outlets and get a lot of publicity). Remember 50% larger than an unknown quantity doesn't tell us much at all.

Ryan's survey was a WotC survey. So WotC under Dancey was truthful, and WotC with Charles Ryan and Scott Rouse is a lying sack of suits.

What? Seriously - what in particular are you talking about? The 2000 survey asks about general RPG gamers and wargamers. Rouse speaks specifically to active D&D 3.x gamers. The two are not comparable at all.

And my point is that saturation is 'possible', since I have a hard time with the 'we've been making minis for 35 years and still haven't saturated the market' argument for predicting future possibilities.

For your premise of saturation to hold true - there would need to be a Law of Conservation of Miniatures. Miniatures can never be destroyed and will always migrate to new gamers when old gamers quit. This however is not true. Half the people who ever start gaming quit gaming. When they quit...most of their miniatures are actually removed from the market - however there will always be new gamers who want to build collections and armies.

In terms of the numbers...again, your premise in the other thread refers to worldwide gamers not US. The 2000 survey is US only, only between ages 12-35. You can not use the numbers to represent anything else other than that (also taking into account that the survey was performed prior to DDM and many other PPM lines...so it is quite reasonable to assume that the percentage of people who use miniatures while they play RPGs is actually much higher now). You also are making statements regarding miniatures and ignoring wargamers. Wargamers probably buy 3 or 4 miniatures for every 1 bought by an RPG player (likely quite a bit more). In that regards, I have single armies which have nearly 1000 miniatures in my collection.

Dragon Magazine also is only applicable to people who player the current version of D&D (roughly half the RPG players). If you try to make any assumptions from that, you miss out on a large number of gamers who are probably even more dedicated than you average D&D player and have more money to spend on miniatures (since less of their entertainment dollar is being spent on new versions of books).

60,000 of those seems like a reasonable number to assume have large and wide miniature collections for TTRPG which was my reasoning in the other forum and which oddly enough coincides with my best 'guess' for cases per DDM set sold

Again, you don't explain how you came to your numbers. The ones you do explain are not applicable to the miniature market as a whole, it is for other things (as I pointed out above more than once). 60,000 is reasonable? By what measure? How do you determine that is reasonable? Do you have anecdotal information to justify it, do you have sales figures to justify it?

If I were to desire to figure out what would be a good measure of cases sold per person - start with the sales numbers provided over at The Gaming Report (it isn't DDM only - but as I said, they are not the only game in town). $23 - $40 million worth of collectible miniatures sold in 2004. If you figure a dollar per miniature on average, that is 23 - 40 million miniatures divided between 1.125 million RPG gamers in the US. Each gamer would only need to buy a few boxes over the course of the year in order to hit those numbers (one box of each DDM set released in 2004 would do it). That isn't very hard to imagine at all. You can find additional reports for the following years as well on the Gaming Reports website - but remember it is the North American market only that is dealt with there (and considering it is sales for the whole North American market but players for only the US...even less difficult to imagine the sales being a piece of cake to handle).

I'll be waiting to see your 2009 survey posted so I can help you surpass your 2008 numbers (Try not to bury it in the Off-topic/General forum next time). The 2007 and 2008 surveys looked very one sided just based on where it was advertised (don't make too many assumptions on whether people prefer to paint or just play when the survey was only solicited on die-hard painting sites).

It wasn't hidden anywhere. It was on the front page of several gaming news sites for several days. Here though, it gets posted in Off-Topic (and will continue to be posted there) since it is off-topic. The target audience for the data are smaller gaming companies who make metal miniatures. Their customers hang out on the places that I post the survey.

[JodyJ]

You also note at MaxMinis that 10 sets are still available, but you claim here that they consistently sell out after 15 months - do you have new info?

Well there's two ways of measuring a 'sell out'. And I used both of them in my rather swiss-cheese style rambling case for guess-timating the number of mini-collecting groups. And then based on that wild speculation picked a potential saturation point - since as you said, only WotC has the numbers.

DDM sets have consistently sold out from the WotC warehouses in an average of at most 15 months. (For example the latest set to sell out was actually reported during the threads original composition - from Mar 07). Currently distributors can buy 3 sets from WotC. So 12 are out of print.

Miniatures are obviously still available until they clear the sales channels (distributors and stores) - this is the second measure of 'sell out'. This is harder to track since regionally stores can sit on stuff well beyond the OOP point. Generally speaking once the product is not available at the distributor level and at retail (or less) from the online venders (since it is easiest to track) I would consider it no longer available. At one distributor who happens to have their DB open to guests - 3 sets are listed as readily available (because WotC still has them in the warehouse) and 5 are Out of Print (4 of those are in limited quantities).

And before we say that DDM isn't selling because they still have so much plastic in the channel - 3 of the Limited or OOP sets were re-printed (second production run) which pretty much resets the 'sell out' time table.

Those are the easy numbers to get.