If the author was publishing the material - that would seem reasonable. The publishing market as a whole has long had expectations that things like editors and proof readers are part of the production chain. Publishers are largely responsible for gaffs. We don't buy from the author.I think a bunch of this should lay at the author's door you know.
I'm not.I am amazed Mongoose are not in administration by now. I know many firms a lot better than Mongoose who have gone down in this recession. Recessions are great for killing off the dead wood.
And I'm not sure how one would define 'a lot better than Mongoose' in a general sense...
Mongoose aims to make products people want to play - they have a passion for generally the same stuff as their players. They also make quite the effort to address issues post sale. They have these critical parts nailed down - and I believe it assures a certain level of success when other companies would fail.
Their customer service, at least from my perspective, is far better than most companies in the market. I also don't believe they set out with the intent to make a low quality product just to make a buck - I think its more lack of know how, lack of best practice processes, and being too enthusiastic and close to their own products to undertake qualified, unbiased, proofing.
Reasonably, far less than 10% of the market shares my buying practices... but Mongoose has lost not only that small market share, they have spent money that would not have had to been spent, given a better showing pre-production.
For example, I have every confidence Matt and company would have addressed, the best they reasonably could, my dissatisfaction with the material quality of my books - re: their peeled covers and broken backs - if I emailed a complaint about it.
But, I would rather he and his company spend their time and other resources on making additional and better products.