Well it's a damn good thing that you are around to go set the record straight on multiple sites. "Morbid curiosity".....lol.
I'm am not, was mostly in the own community spectrum and reddit, where mostly people were coming wtf'ing about what was going on.But CIG was decently fast to react and provide a clarification to clear up the BS and stop further escalation.
Resuming this with a bit of Roleplay...
Hello Backers and welcome to today's ATV!
In Today's Episode, we will talk about...
See you, a loan the Verse!
And on Massively......but whatever.
You guys keep jumping on those ships so I can finally get a modern Wing Commander.
Amazing the lengths people will go to defend something that turns out to not be an issue at all.
They clearly have no faith.
Have fun
Completely lost faith whille the haters lost face.
How can you lose face over speculations.
Funny how people are so willing to trust an entertainment lawyer working for a company selling jpegs for $500 a piece.
because most were adamant that their speculation will come up true or was true and as always with SC topics, people eventually start stating their speculation as fact. Check the twitter post earlier in the thread and journalists posting news about it without any information.
Not trying to poke fun, but what's funny is people can't just take it on the chin that they were wrong and move on.
I agree with most of that. Holding these sort of things up as proof that the company is in dire straits has the potential to bite people in the ass. But in my case and the things I was arguing with Max about, I am right about the terms of the loan, nothing has changed there.
So, after reading what was said, it's quite obvious money is tight and rather than shuffle different currencies around, CIG took out a loan to acquire the money they would get from their refund next fall sooner. In my opinion, all I see is a game development that is NOT managing their money properly. The fact you NEED to take out a loan because you can't wait for a refund 6 months down the road sounds like someone needs to curb their spending habits outside of production.
Can you please stop analyzing things and just celebrate that Derek Smart was wrong? Nothing else matters.
the issue with "discussions" concerning Star Citizen is that there are rarely any honest actors, especially those who are detractors of the game, and so there can be no meaningful discussion to be had. i mean just take this whole loan thing as an example, instead of owning up to mistakes and showing some honesty and integrity and apologizing for misinformation and arguing from a place of ignorance, commentators just try and sweep things under the rug and act as though they still had some valid point, which has now either been proven wrong or to which they cannot provide evidence to support.
how can you want your opinions to be respected when you are so unwilling to give said respect to others yourself? and how can we have any kind of robust discussions about SC/SQ42 when people instead of arguing the facts in hand want to argue bias, feelings, and opinions?
we all get caught up sometimes and say things that we regret, it takes courage to admit when you are wrong. unless of course disharmony is all you really cared about in the first place and being intellectually honest was never the goal. /shrug
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
the issue with "discussions" concerning Star Citizen is that there are rarely any honest actors, especially those who are detractors of the game, and so there can be no meaningful discussion to be had. i mean just take this whole loan thing as an example, instead of owning up to mistakes and showing some honesty and integrity and apologizing for misinformation and arguing from a place of ignorance, commentators just try and sweep things under the rug and act as though they still had some valid point, which has now either been proven wrong or to which they cannot provide evidence to support.
how can you want your opinions to be respected when you are so unwilling to give said respect to others yourself? and how can we have any kind of robust discussions about SC/SQ42 when people instead of arguing the facts in hand want to argue bias, feelings, and opinions?
we all get caught up sometimes and say things that we regret, it takes courage to admit when you are wrong. unless of course disharmony is all you really cared about in the first place and being intellectually honest was never the goal. /shrug
I like how you only argue one side of the argument. EVERYONE was speculating from both sides.. noone knew why CIG did it until the speculation made them come out and give an explanation.
Even after they explained and white knights came out laughing and saying "see? everything is fine!", perfectly logical people are still concerned... just like the reddit link posted above.
the issue with "discussions" concerning Star Citizen is that there are rarely any honest actors, especially those who are detractors of the game, and so there can be no meaningful discussion to be had. i mean just take this whole loan thing as an example, instead of owning up to mistakes and showing some honesty and integrity and apologizing for misinformation and arguing from a place of ignorance, commentators just try and sweep things under the rug and act as though they still had some valid point, which has now either been proven wrong or to which they cannot provide evidence to support.
how can you want your opinions to be respected when you are so unwilling to give said respect to others yourself? and how can we have any kind of robust discussions about SC/SQ42 when people instead of arguing the facts in hand want to argue bias, feelings, and opinions?
we all get caught up sometimes and say things that we regret, it takes courage to admit when you are wrong. unless of course disharmony is all you really cared about in the first place and being intellectually honest was never the goal. /shrug
If only CIG were an open and honest company then we wouldn't need to have pages upon pages of speculation and theory crafting. Instead they should live up to their promises of being the most open game development ever and actually share shit that matters.
The fastest way to have killed this thread would be to stop it before it even started. CIG could have issued a statement saying "Hey we took out a loan, heres the details, heres what it means and this is blah blah blah". Instead they wait for people to find it themselves (and it would have been found because it was filed in the UK), post it, speculate on it and start a firestorm which just damages their image even further because disinformation gets out or people start to think maybe they aren't as open or honest as I was lead to believe.
We never will have any robust discussions on SC because the things that matter that are posted or talked about can change on a whim, never materialize or be some sort of half truth and so we talk about opinions.
It is a good analysis of the situation, and response by Ortwin, but of course, all the usual suspect's will just click "lol" or "wtf" as if that negate's everything said in anything but a positive manner.
If CIG really went to the bank, asked for a loan based on a tax credit, being paid out by the government, why the need for the floating charge, or the negative pledge?
Seem's obvious to me that the bank needed more assurance because CIG are financially unstable.
But oh well, it is what it is, and time will tell.
*edit* Thank You piggy one, for proving my point *edit*
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Seem's obvious to me that the bank needed more assurance because CIG are financially unstable.
Your bias makes things obvious to blind eyes.
The majority of what they could give as assurance is office furniture and equipment, they don't own the UK office buildings and so forth.
Selective one-sided perceptions, we already have Smart for that, go grab a proper lawyer (within a neutral standpoint) to review the document and you'll see the discrepancies.
"EDITOR’S NOTE: Cloud Imperium Games have now released a statement
about this situation and it appears that the below referred to a
Government Game tax credit rebate. We’d like to apologise to Cloud
Imperium Games for not clarifying with them on the specifics of this
prior to posting. We wish them all the best on the ongoing Star Citizen
development."
Well, at least the journalists are man enough to apologise .....
Seem's obvious to me that the bank needed more assurance because CIG are financially unstable.
I wonder how much of that is down to the bank's view of something like crowdfunding, they might see it as being too volatile for their liking.
It is possible.
If CIG are burning through 2 million a month with ongoing cost's, and they have 2.5 million a month income from backer's, the bank might feel that is not a stable enough financial situation, as income from backer's has dropped steadily over previous month's, or maybe they do not trust that income from backer's will be maintained at that level for the next few month's (figure's used as an example only).
So rather than rely solely on a tax credit that may or may not arrive a few month's down the line, they required more collateral.
Post edited by Excession on
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Seem's obvious to me that the bank needed more assurance because CIG are financially unstable.
Your bias makes things obvious to blind eyes.
The majority of what they could give as assurance is office furniture and equipment, they don't own the UK office buildings and so forth.
Selective one-sided perceptions, we already have Smart for that, go grab a proper lawyer (within a neutral standpoint) to review the document and you'll see the discrepancies.
See, you say I am biased, then go on and make a biased post.
The document's that have already been posted with regard's to this, show that it is more than just furniture and equipment, it is also all copies made or to be made of the game, and the game assets and distribution rights, plus pretty much everything else to do with Foundry 42.
Sure, Star Citizen is listed as excluded collateral, but how much coding/work from F42 is/will be used as part of SC?
As I said before, it is what it is, time will tell if taking out a loan was a good move or not, nothing wrong with a bit of speculation about it.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Seem's obvious to me that the bank needed more assurance because CIG are financially unstable.
Your bias makes things obvious to blind eyes.
The majority of what they could give as assurance is office furniture and equipment, they don't own the UK office buildings and so forth.
Selective one-sided perceptions, we already have Smart for that, go grab a proper lawyer (within a neutral standpoint) to review the document and you'll see the discrepancies.
See, you say I am biased, then go on and make a biased post.
The document's that have already been posted with regard's to this, show that it is more than just furniture and equipment, it is also all copies made or to be made of the game, and the game assets and distribution rights, plus pretty much everything else to do with Foundry 42.
Sure, Star Citizen is listed as excluded collateral, but how much coding/work from F42 is/will be used as part of SC?
As I said before, it is what it is, time will tell if taking out a loan was a good move or not, nothing wrong with a bit of speculation about it.
Exactly this. If for whatever reason they default and the bank takes possession of everything F42 has made how long before the bank notices that some of the assets they now own are also in SC and they go after CIG for using assets they don't own?
See, you say I am biased, then go on and make a biased post.
The document's that have already been posted with regard's to this, show that it is more than just furniture and equipment, it is also all copies made or to be made of the game, and the game assets and distribution rights, plus pretty much everything else to do with Foundry 42.
Sure, Star Citizen is listed as excluded collateral, but how much coding/work from F42 is/will be used as part of SC?
As I said before, it is what it is, time will tell if taking out a loan was a good move or not, nothing wrong with a bit of speculation about it.
Of the game, SQ42, not SC.
Same engine, two different games, that's why they were split. Aside from the obvious fact, their engine is third-party, CE now Lumberyard.
Again, go prove this with lawyer providing a legal opinion in the document and you will see, we're just throwing unprofessional opinions influenced by our own views in CIG/SC and not from completely neutral standpoints.
See, you say I am biased, then go on and make a biased post.
The document's that have already been posted with regard's to this, show that it is more than just furniture and equipment, it is also all copies made or to be made of the game, and the game assets and distribution rights, plus pretty much everything else to do with Foundry 42.
Sure, Star Citizen is listed as excluded collateral, but how much coding/work from F42 is/will be used as part of SC?
As I said before, it is what it is, time will tell if taking out a loan was a good move or not, nothing wrong with a bit of speculation about it.
Of the game, SQ42, not SC.
Same engine, two different games, that's why they were split. Aside from the obvious fact, their engine is third-party, CE now Lumberyard. With SQ42 being made and released as its own standalone game, then only the codebase behind that release is applied on this.
Again, go prove this with lawyer providing a legal opinion in the document and you will see, we're just throwing unprofessional opinions influenced by bias and posting agendas.
You are missing the point, deliberately perhaps.
F42, and EVERYTHING that is F42, and EVERYTHING that F42 has done, or will do, work wise, is covered by the floating charge.
You say SQ42 is not SC, and SC is not SQ42, and that is correct, up to a point, but they are not completely separate, different games, they use the same code, they use the same asset's, for both game's.
How much of that coding work, and that asset work, has been produced by F42?
If they default, go insolvent, and the bank takes possession of F42, as the floating charge states, how much work, coding and asset wise, will need to be redone for SC?
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Comments
You guys keep jumping on those ships so I can finally get a modern Wing Commander.
And don't look at me, look at those who buy ships because I'm fine with my starter package!
There is indeed an interest charge. However there are also currency conversion charges - for converting dollar and euro pledges into pounds.
They have calculated that:
the interest paid on getting money upfront
is less than
the cost of converting the dollar and euro pledge money.
In what world does that not make sense?
(Edited - thanks to Kefo
You know the answer deep down.
I agree with most of that. Holding these sort of things up as proof that the company is in dire straits has the potential to bite people in the ass. But in my case and the things I was arguing with Max about, I am right about the terms of the loan, nothing has changed there.
Nothing else matters.
..Cake..
Get your facts straight.
All neccessary information to be found upthread.
Have fun
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/comments/6jgfq0/official_cig_response_to_the_loan_news/djeboq8/
how can you want your opinions to be respected when you are so unwilling to give said respect to others yourself? and how can we have any kind of robust discussions about SC/SQ42 when people instead of arguing the facts in hand want to argue bias, feelings, and opinions?
we all get caught up sometimes and say things that we regret, it takes courage to admit when you are wrong. unless of course disharmony is all you really cared about in the first place and being intellectually honest was never the goal. /shrug
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
EVERYONE was speculating from both sides.. noone knew why CIG did it until the speculation made them come out and give an explanation.
Even after they explained and white knights came out laughing and saying "see? everything is fine!", perfectly logical people are still concerned... just like the reddit link posted above.
..Cake..
If only CIG were an open and honest company then we wouldn't need to have pages upon pages of speculation and theory crafting. Instead they should live up to their promises of being the most open game development ever and actually share shit that matters.
The fastest way to have killed this thread would be to stop it before it even started. CIG could have issued a statement saying "Hey we took out a loan, heres the details, heres what it means and this is blah blah blah". Instead they wait for people to find it themselves (and it would have been found because it was filed in the UK), post it, speculate on it and start a firestorm which just damages their image even further because disinformation gets out or people start to think maybe they aren't as open or honest as I was lead to believe.
We never will have any robust discussions on SC because the things that matter that are posted or talked about can change on a whim, never materialize or be some sort of half truth and so we talk about opinions.
If CIG really went to the bank, asked for a loan based on a tax credit, being paid out by the government, why the need for the floating charge, or the negative pledge?
Seem's obvious to me that the bank needed more assurance because CIG are financially unstable.
But oh well, it is what it is, and time will tell.
*edit* Thank You piggy one, for proving my point *edit*
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
I wonder how much of that is down to the bank's view of something like crowdfunding, they might see it as being too volatile for their liking.
The majority of what they could give as assurance is office furniture and equipment, they don't own the UK office buildings and so forth.
Selective one-sided perceptions, we already have Smart for that, go grab a proper lawyer (within a neutral standpoint) to review the document and you'll see the discrepancies.
http://press-start.com.au/news/2017/06/25/clarification-status-star-citizen-development/
The other articles have also posted corrections.
http://www.inquisitr.com/4322447/is-star-citizen-in-trouble-with-a-loan-and-owned-by-a-bank-no-not-really/
https://www.pcgamesn.com/star-citizen/star-citizen-loan-coutts-and-co
Have fun
PS: For the German speaking readers
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Star-Citizen-Spiel-3481/News/Cloud-Imperium-Games-dementiert-Geruechte-ueber-Geldprobleme-1231521/
Well, at least the journalists are man enough to apologise .....
Have fun
If CIG are burning through 2 million a month with ongoing cost's, and they have 2.5 million a month income from backer's, the bank might feel that is not a stable enough financial situation, as income from backer's has dropped steadily over previous month's, or maybe they do not trust that income from backer's will be maintained at that level for the next few month's (figure's used as an example only).
So rather than rely solely on a tax credit that may or may not arrive a few month's down the line, they required more collateral.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
The document's that have already been posted with regard's to this, show that it is more than just furniture and equipment, it is also all copies made or to be made of the game, and the game assets and distribution rights, plus pretty much everything else to do with Foundry 42.
Sure, Star Citizen is listed as excluded collateral, but how much coding/work from F42 is/will be used as part of SC?
As I said before, it is what it is, time will tell if taking out a loan was a good move or not, nothing wrong with a bit of speculation about it.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Same engine, two different games, that's why they were split. Aside from the obvious fact, their engine is third-party, CE now Lumberyard.
Again, go prove this with lawyer providing a legal opinion in the document and you will see, we're just throwing unprofessional opinions influenced by our own views in CIG/SC and not from completely neutral standpoints.
F42, and EVERYTHING that is F42, and EVERYTHING that F42 has done, or will do, work wise, is covered by the floating charge.
You say SQ42 is not SC, and SC is not SQ42, and that is correct, up to a point, but they are not completely separate, different games, they use the same code, they use the same asset's, for both game's.
How much of that coding work, and that asset work, has been produced by F42?
If they default, go insolvent, and the bank takes possession of F42, as the floating charge states, how much work, coding and asset wise, will need to be redone for SC?
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.