Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Star Citizen, I am disappointed.

15681011

Comments

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,870
    Orinori said:
    Kefo said:
    Orinori said:
    Reigning him in was always for the benefit of the investors in order to try to achieve maximum profit in cheapest turn around possible. Reigning in was never and will NEVER be for the benefit of providing the fans of the game a more awesome experience. 



    No reigning him in was for the benefit of the gamers. Chris Roberts is a thinker and a dreamer which is a great combo when it comes to coming up with new ideas but he needs someone to curb the ambition, which like I said he has admitted to.

    When someone is standing over him telling him to stay on task then you get games like wing commander. When he is allowed to run his own game studio then you get ideas that make the studio produce nothing before they realize oh shit we are out of money because we wasted time trying to perfect everything instead of focusing on a few elements and making them shine Or if he’s allowed to direct his own movie then you get crap like the wing commander movie where he was again trying for too much with not enough time and money.

    Last time Microsoft bailed his studio out and saved the games he started by cutting out the dreams and paring things down to reality. This time it seems backers are taking the place of Microsoft but unfortunately they can’t remove him from power like MS did


    p.s I actually loved the Wing Commander movie and have seen it multiple times. I am an actual Sci Fi fan :)



    Okay, not going to trust your taste in film from now on either.  ;)
    Orinori

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited January 2018
    Chris Roberts has shown them to be wrong, with his claim that if funding was to stop, they would have still enough money.
    That does not mean they would be willing to make a stand against their community about something, killing their funding stream, even if they could sustain the development by themselves to finish and release SQ42, then SC.

    I find unlikely if it could lead to such consequence, such pressure would not result on them giving in or respond to it in some way. Like they would sacrifice/harm their funding stream just like that, no way mister.
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
    randomhuman
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,870
    Kefo said:
    Erillion said:
    Ah yes, as you are from London ..... it has been many years now that the economic success of a movie  primarily was coming from the english speaking countries and/or the first four box office weekends.  Worldwide box office, DVD, streaming, blue ray, TV rights, merchandizing form a HUGE part of the lifetime income.


    Have fun
    What?
    Moving the goalposts in a futile attempt to represent all things Roberts as golden.

    The WC movie was an utter failure, so bad that Roberts never again  directed a movie.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • randomhumanrandomhuman Member CommonPosts: 3
    Orinori said:
    Talonsin said:
    Orinori said:
    Talonsin said:
    Erillion said:
    "as a collective backers have full control over the projects future"

    What does that mean?  If I can get enough of the backers to support having all the ships painted pink, will they do it?  I doubt it.  So how much control do the backers really have?  Sure they could stop buying ships but then they would lose their perceived advantages when the game finally launches.

    This concept that backers have FULL control is the very definition of BS.  When backers make a poll on the official forum that CIG doesnt like, it gets locked.  An example is when backers did a poll about allowing refunds.

    Image result for star citizen forum poll about refunds
    25 percent of backers felt refunds should be available but CIG closed than locked the thread.  Now can you honestly say that those 25% of backers had full control of the project?  If they had not locked that thread, could that percentage have been higher?
    Having glanced at your post now, i can refer you to a reply that already clarifies that earlier - 

    "backers may influence direction of that vision if deemed a sound decision to make, but individual backers do not hold all power to completely control direction of the vision"

    IF DEEMED A SOUND DECISION, backers are not game developers and mostly do not hold the skill set to make correct choices. We are backing Chris Roberts vision, not 10yr old john and his vision. However backers, as an individual or a collective can make their case and after evaluation, if deemed to be a sound decision then things can be altered. Ultimately though if backers are not happy with direction, as a collective they can stop supporting the project and it will end.
    But that is not what Erillion said.  He said collectively backers have FULL control.  Not financial control or control based on good decisions, he said FULL control which thanks to your post has been that he was wrong. 
    No point even trying to show how wrong Orinori, Maxbacon, or Erillion can be, and are, they will either ignore it, or play the straw man game.

    They all agree with each other, and all have been shown to be wrong.

    Orinori said:
    Backers are in control here not investors looking for profit.
    Hence backers control the entire project

    MaxBacon said:
    This is absolutely true.

    Erillion said:
    "as a collective backers have full control over the projects future"
    THIS

    Chris Roberts has shown them to be wrong, with his claim that if funding was to stop, they would have still enough money.
    Which still does not make investors in control as stated. Backers do have some control, I have admitted already that your point was valid and that backers control to shut down the project is now probably a past tense position.

    Perhaps it might help to read all posts, understand all posts and replies before just posting aggressive tripe. You just look foolish.
    Oh look, here comes the ad hominem.

    Still I guess it serves to keep the thread off the topic of SC being a disappointment, as being on topic about SC in the negative just will not do.
  • ArillixArillix Member UncommonPosts: 88
    Chris Roberts founded Ascendant Pictures in early 2003 and in just a short time, established himself and the company as a force in the world of independent film production and finance. In 2004, Roberts earned an Executive Producer credit on The Punisher and produced The Big White (Robin Williams, Holly Hunter, Woody Harrelson) and Lord Of War (Nicolas Cage, Ethan Hawke, Jared Leto). In 2005, Roberts produced Lucky Number Slevin. In addition, he served as Executive Producer on The Jacket (Adrien Brody and Keira Knightly) and the upcoming Robert Towne film, Ask The Dust (Colin Farrell and Selma Hayek). The end of 2006 finds him producing the effects laden sci-fi Viking project, Outlander starring Jim Caviezel, Sophia Myles and Jack Huston and to be directed by Howard McCain. Principal photography began October 16 in Nova Scotia and will continue through January 2007. Roberts will also serve as Executive Producer on Black Water Transit which films January 2007 in New Orleans.

    Prior to founding Ascendant, Roberts was Chairman and CEO of Digital Anvil (DA), the game development and digital effects company he founded in 1996 with funding from Microsoft and Advanced Micro Devices. Roberts guided DA's growth to annual revenues of $14 million, prior to the release of many of its games in development. His innovations changed the gaming industry. His games were the first to perfect the use of 35mm film as narrative in interactive game titles, and DA became the first interactive entertainment company to produce a game title, Wing Commander, into a $25 million feature film, directed and produced by Roberts. The film starred Freddie Prinze, Jr. (I Know What You Did Last Summer), Saffron Burrows (Deep Blue Sea) and Matthew Lillard (Scooby Doo).

    DA and the video game titles it created won numerous gaming awards and the company became a digital effects powerhouse, creating all of the digital effects for the Wing Commander movie and contributing to the digital effects for several other films, including Spy Kids. In December of 2000, Roberts sold DA to Microsoft. DA remains a successful subsidiary of Microsoft and content provider for the XBox.

    In 1987, Roberts joined Origin Systems, Inc. (OSI), which was later acquired as a wholly owned subsidiary by Electronic Arts (EA) in 1992 for $30 million. Roberts was instrumental in OSI's growth from a company with $4 million in annual revenues to a company with annual revenues of $50 million. In 1990, Roberts developed Wing Commander, which set a new standard in PC games and evolved into a franchise series of game titles, all developed and produced by Roberts. With its cinematic quality, clearly developed story lines and well-known actors, the Wing Commander series created a whole new genre within the gaming industry known as the "interactive movie." By 1995, the Wing Commander series had generated well over $110 million in revenues, and from 1990 to 1995, the Wing Commander series accounted for more than 60% of OSI's revenue. In addition to selling more than 3 million units worldwide by 1995, the Wing Commander series won a record setting number of gaming awards. To date, the series has generated over $400 million in global retail revenue.

    A gaming wonder kid, Roberts sold his first computer game at the age of 14, and by the age of 20, Roberts had developed three #1 hits in his native U.K.: Match Day, Wiz Adore and Stryker's Run.

    Sounds, like a power broker type business man.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Orinori said:
    Talonsin said:
    Orinori said:
    Talonsin said:
    Erillion said:
    "as a collective backers have full control over the projects future"

    What does that mean?  If I can get enough of the backers to support having all the ships painted pink, will they do it?  I doubt it.  So how much control do the backers really have?  Sure they could stop buying ships but then they would lose their perceived advantages when the game finally launches.

    This concept that backers have FULL control is the very definition of BS.  When backers make a poll on the official forum that CIG doesnt like, it gets locked.  An example is when backers did a poll about allowing refunds.

    Image result for star citizen forum poll about refunds
    25 percent of backers felt refunds should be available but CIG closed than locked the thread.  Now can you honestly say that those 25% of backers had full control of the project?  If they had not locked that thread, could that percentage have been higher?
    Having glanced at your post now, i can refer you to a reply that already clarifies that earlier - 

    "backers may influence direction of that vision if deemed a sound decision to make, but individual backers do not hold all power to completely control direction of the vision"

    IF DEEMED A SOUND DECISION, backers are not game developers and mostly do not hold the skill set to make correct choices. We are backing Chris Roberts vision, not 10yr old john and his vision. However backers, as an individual or a collective can make their case and after evaluation, if deemed to be a sound decision then things can be altered. Ultimately though if backers are not happy with direction, as a collective they can stop supporting the project and it will end.
    But that is not what Erillion said.  He said collectively backers have FULL control.  Not financial control or control based on good decisions, he said FULL control which thanks to your post has been that he was wrong. 
    No point even trying to show how wrong Orinori, Maxbacon, or Erillion can be, and are, they will either ignore it, or play the straw man game.

    They all agree with each other, and all have been shown to be wrong.

    Orinori said:
    Backers are in control here not investors looking for profit.
    Hence backers control the entire project

    MaxBacon said:
    This is absolutely true.

    Erillion said:
    "as a collective backers have full control over the projects future"
    THIS

    Chris Roberts has shown them to be wrong, with his claim that if funding was to stop, they would have still enough money.
    Which still does not make investors in control as stated. Backers do have some control, I have admitted already that your point was valid and that backers control to shut down the project is now probably a past tense position.

    Perhaps it might help to read all posts, understand all posts and replies before just posting aggressive tripe. You just look foolish.
    Oh look, here comes the ad hominem.

    Still I guess it serves to keep the thread off the topic of SC being a disappointment, as being on topic about SC in the negative just will not do.
    Oh look, you ignored the contents of a post, for a second time. 
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018

    Orinori, you say the backers have a say in Star Citizen because they can simply stop giving them money if they aren't happy, right?  That's true in some interpretations, but what about backers that ARE happy but the amount of money they can and are giving to CiG isn't ENOUGH anyways?

    Because that's what's happening right now, apparently.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08703814/filing-history

    The financial statements for Chris's Foundry 42 studio were filed as legally required yesterday and they paint a pretty horrible picture of the studio's financial situation.  That big Couts loan is still there and they only have an absolutely pathetic amount of cash on hand.  They have that upcoming tax credit but at best it'll only cancel out some of the loan amount (especially since they're now saying on those statements that it's less than they thought it'd be) and then Foundry 42 will still be left with almost nothing.  So unless CiG has a ton of its money squirrelled around somewhere else in one of its shell companies, it looks like the backers' "say" and control boils down to "we didn't give them enough money", whether that was what they intended to say or not.

    For crying out loud, they're now looking into paying employees with shares of the company.  (in addition to the clear desperation for funds that this shows, where is that backer control once there are other people there who have shares of the company?)

    I suggest pledging more if you truly wish to see Star Citizen come to fruition.  Your $35 was used up long ago.  Do you want your say as a backer?  Do you want to say "Star Citizen, I want to see you LIVE!"  Then speak with your wallet!  Because otherwise Star Citizen will die.

    Seriously.

    PLEDGE MORE.  SAVE STAR CITIZEN.  FOR THE LOVE OF ROBERTS, BUY A TANK AND SOME LAND TO PUT IT ON OR SOMETHING!




    ...I love how the salaries per employee are going down the tubes but the "directors" salary is remaining steady (FYI the right column is for an entire year while the left is for only 6 months)
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    Tiamat64 said:

    Orinori, you say the backers have a say in Star Citizen because they can simply stop giving them money if they aren't happy, right?  That's true, but what about backers that ARE happy but the amount of money they can and are giving to CiG isn't ENOUGH anyways?

    Because that's what's happening right now, apparently.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08703814/filing-history

    The financial statements for Chris's Foundry 42 studio were filed as legally required yesterday and they paint a pretty horrible picture of the studio's financial situation.  That big Couts loan is still there and they only have an absolutely pathetic amount of cash on hand.  They have that upcoming tax credit but at best it'll only cancel out some of the loan amount and then Foundry 42 will still be left with almost nothing.  So unless CiG has a ton of its money squirrelled around somewhere else in one of its shell companies, it looks like the backers' "say" and control boils down to "we didn't give them enough money", whether that was what they intended to say or not.

    For crying out loud, they're now looking into paying employees with shares of the company.  (in addition to the clear desperation for funds that this shows, where is that backer control once there are other people there who have shares of the company?)

    I suggest pledging more if you truly wish to see Star Citizen come to fruition.  Your $35 was used up long ago.  Do you want your say as a backer?  Do you want to say "Star Citizen, I want to see you LIVE!"  Then speak with your wallet!  Because otherwise Star Citizen will die.

    Seriously.

    PLEDGE MORE.  SAVE STAR CITIZEN.




    ...I love how the salaries per employee are going down the tubes but the "directors" salary is remaining steady (the right column is for an entire year while the left is for only 6 months)
    F42 is only 1 part of the company, I am not sure what you hope to achieve by looking there. Any time I have looked at those with my accountant it paints a rather healthy picture for the UK office, but that's not much of a surprise. One of the ways I like to judge the accounts is this - are they still in business paying all employees? check. Have they laid masses of people off before winding down on certain areas of production? no? check. All good then!

    I can see not knowing their finances really grates at you! Well here is to hoping they make a settlement with CryTek for my maximum amusement :D  

    You also love my $35! Sorry friend but this is just how crowdfunding works, you only need to invest as much as it takes to get access. You should try it like all the many thousands of new customers weekly do! There was a holiday buy in for $35 I think (lots and lots of others bought it, they all got a $35 package also, imagine!), hope you got it if you not on board yet!
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,328
    Tiamat64 said:

    Orinori, you say the backers have a say in Star Citizen because they can simply stop giving them money if they aren't happy, right?  That's true in some interpretations, but what about backers that ARE happy but the amount of money they can and are giving to CiG isn't ENOUGH anyways?

    Because that's what's happening right now, apparently.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08703814/filing-history

    The financial statements for Chris's Foundry 42 studio were filed as legally required yesterday and they paint a pretty horrible picture of the studio's financial situation.  That big Couts loan is still there and they only have an absolutely pathetic amount of cash on hand.  They have that upcoming tax credit but at best it'll only cancel out some of the loan amount (especially since they're now saying on those statements that it's less than they thought it'd be) and then Foundry 42 will still be left with almost nothing.  So unless CiG has a ton of its money squirrelled around somewhere else in one of its shell companies, it looks like the backers' "say" and control boils down to "we didn't give them enough money", whether that was what they intended to say or not.

    For crying out loud, they're now looking into paying employees with shares of the company.  (in addition to the clear desperation for funds that this shows, where is that backer control once there are other people there who have shares of the company?)

    I suggest pledging more if you truly wish to see Star Citizen come to fruition.  Your $35 was used up long ago.  Do you want your say as a backer?  Do you want to say "Star Citizen, I want to see you LIVE!"  Then speak with your wallet!  Because otherwise Star Citizen will die.

    Seriously.

    PLEDGE MORE.  SAVE STAR CITIZEN.  FOR THE LOVE OF ROBERTS, BUY A TANK AND SOME LAND TO PUT IT ON OR SOMETHING!




    ...I love how the salaries per employee are going down the tubes but the "directors" salary is remaining steady (FYI the right column is for an entire year while the left is for only 6 months)
    No offense

    But you really need to work on your accounting skills.

    How does having a gross profit of 561,037 pounds sterling for only half the fiscal year equate to the disaster your trying to paint?

    You do know that profit is tallied after all the bills are paid and it's what the government at the end of the day taxes you on.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member EpicPosts: 7,275
    edited January 2018
    laserit said:
    No offense

    But you really need to work on your accounting skills.

    How does having a gross profit of 561,037 pounds sterling for only half the fiscal year equate to the disaster your trying to paint?

    You do know that profit is tallied after all the bills are paid and it's what the government at the end of the day taxes you on.
    The FQ42 company was never the main company in the whole financials and this is well known, they just get money from the international RSI one as they do have to convert to the pound to get money in the UK, typical hyperbole... 

    But hey, evil SC fans so... stuff. The SC apocalypse is coming I tell you! Every year the same story when they do filings, it's crazy.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    MaxBacon said:

    But hey, evil SC fans so... stuff. 
    My name is Orinori and I............. am an evil SC fan :(

    I come to the Star Citizen forums and I say things like 'I like Star Citizen' and 'I bought it for $35 and spent loads of hours in it, its ace!'. I realize this is very disruptive to the community. It is always hard when you realize it is not just you who suffers, but it is also the people around you.
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018
    laserit said:
    Tiamat64 said:

    Orinori, you say the backers have a say in Star Citizen because they can simply stop giving them money if they aren't happy, right?  That's true in some interpretations, but what about backers that ARE happy but the amount of money they can and are giving to CiG isn't ENOUGH anyways?

    Because that's what's happening right now, apparently.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08703814/filing-history

    The financial statements for Chris's Foundry 42 studio were filed as legally required yesterday and they paint a pretty horrible picture of the studio's financial situation.  That big Couts loan is still there and they only have an absolutely pathetic amount of cash on hand.  They have that upcoming tax credit but at best it'll only cancel out some of the loan amount (especially since they're now saying on those statements that it's less than they thought it'd be) and then Foundry 42 will still be left with almost nothing.  So unless CiG has a ton of its money squirrelled around somewhere else in one of its shell companies, it looks like the backers' "say" and control boils down to "we didn't give them enough money", whether that was what they intended to say or not.

    For crying out loud, they're now looking into paying employees with shares of the company.  (in addition to the clear desperation for funds that this shows, where is that backer control once there are other people there who have shares of the company?)

    I suggest pledging more if you truly wish to see Star Citizen come to fruition.  Your $35 was used up long ago.  Do you want your say as a backer?  Do you want to say "Star Citizen, I want to see you LIVE!"  Then speak with your wallet!  Because otherwise Star Citizen will die.

    Seriously.

    PLEDGE MORE.  SAVE STAR CITIZEN.  FOR THE LOVE OF ROBERTS, BUY A TANK AND SOME LAND TO PUT IT ON OR SOMETHING!




    ...I love how the salaries per employee are going down the tubes but the "directors" salary is remaining steady (FYI the right column is for an entire year while the left is for only 6 months)
    No offense

    But you really need to work on your accounting skills.

    How does having a gross profit of 561,037 pounds sterling for only half the fiscal year equate to the disaster your trying to paint?

    You do know that profit is tallied after all the bills are paid and it's what the government at the end of the day taxes you on.
    Yea, um... I suggest reading the operating profit section of the financial statement's notes and then look at what the operating profit actually IS.  I assume from the tone of your post that you're an accountant too so I don't have to explain anything further to you for you to understand it.
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018

    Orinori:

     F42 is only 1 part of the company, I am not sure what you hope to achieve by looking there. Any time I have looked at those with my accountant it paints a rather healthy picture for the UK office, but that's not much of a surprise. One of the ways I like to judge the accounts is this - are they still in business paying all employees? check. Have they laid masses of people off before winding down on certain areas of production? no? check. All good then!

    I can see not knowing their finances really grates at you! Well here is to hoping they make a settlement with CryTek for my maximum amusement :D  

    You also love my $35! Sorry friend but this is just how crowdfunding works, you only need to invest as much as it takes to get access. You should try it like all the many thousands of new customers weekly do! There was a holiday buy in for $35 I think (lots and lots of others bought it, they all got a $35 package also, imagine!), hope you got it if you not on board yet!
    Look, if you don't really care whether or not Star Citizen ever comes out, that's fine.  Like I said, you are speaking with your wallet.  It speaks more than all your mounds of text walls here ever could, no matter what you say.
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited January 2018
    Tiamat64 said:
    you are speaking with your wallet.  It speaks more than all your mounds of text walls here ever could,
    That's right sir I gave them my funding. They have a GO! from me. Have you?

    Look, we can all see what you are trying to do but it won't work. I am more than comfortable with the size of my donation. It isn't the size of your donation that counts, it's more what you do with it. For me I always felt comfortable with Chris Roberts. Just ask him, he is fine with small donations, he will tell you the very same thing, you only have to have the smallest donation to gain access and trust me when you do it is a marvelous experience. I am proud of the size of mine and gladly flaunt it here in front of everyone. It seems it's bigger than yours anyway.

    Is this where we going? really ^^, I am a much harder egg to crack sorry :) 
    Post edited by Orinori on
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,328
    Tiamat64 said:
    laserit said:
    Tiamat64 said:

    Orinori, you say the backers have a say in Star Citizen because they can simply stop giving them money if they aren't happy, right?  That's true in some interpretations, but what about backers that ARE happy but the amount of money they can and are giving to CiG isn't ENOUGH anyways?

    Because that's what's happening right now, apparently.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08703814/filing-history

    The financial statements for Chris's Foundry 42 studio were filed as legally required yesterday and they paint a pretty horrible picture of the studio's financial situation.  That big Couts loan is still there and they only have an absolutely pathetic amount of cash on hand.  They have that upcoming tax credit but at best it'll only cancel out some of the loan amount (especially since they're now saying on those statements that it's less than they thought it'd be) and then Foundry 42 will still be left with almost nothing.  So unless CiG has a ton of its money squirrelled around somewhere else in one of its shell companies, it looks like the backers' "say" and control boils down to "we didn't give them enough money", whether that was what they intended to say or not.

    For crying out loud, they're now looking into paying employees with shares of the company.  (in addition to the clear desperation for funds that this shows, where is that backer control once there are other people there who have shares of the company?)

    I suggest pledging more if you truly wish to see Star Citizen come to fruition.  Your $35 was used up long ago.  Do you want your say as a backer?  Do you want to say "Star Citizen, I want to see you LIVE!"  Then speak with your wallet!  Because otherwise Star Citizen will die.

    Seriously.

    PLEDGE MORE.  SAVE STAR CITIZEN.  FOR THE LOVE OF ROBERTS, BUY A TANK AND SOME LAND TO PUT IT ON OR SOMETHING!




    ...I love how the salaries per employee are going down the tubes but the "directors" salary is remaining steady (FYI the right column is for an entire year while the left is for only 6 months)
    No offense

    But you really need to work on your accounting skills.

    How does having a gross profit of 561,037 pounds sterling for only half the fiscal year equate to the disaster your trying to paint?

    You do know that profit is tallied after all the bills are paid and it's what the government at the end of the day taxes you on.
    Yea, um... I suggest reading the operating profit section of the financial statement's notes and then look at what the operating profit actually IS.  I assume from the tone of your post that you're an accountant too so I don't have to explain anything further to you for you to understand it.
    Operating profit is the profit earned from a company's normal business operations. It doesn't include any profits from a companies outside investments and its tabulated before any interest or taxes owed.

    I'm not an accountant, but I do pay one about 60k a year. That accountant is not my employee, Im his client.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018
    Edit:  Actually, nevermind.  If you pay your accountant 60k a year, why should I explain this for free?
    Post edited by Tiamat64 on
    laserit
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,328
    Tiamat64 said:
    Edit:  Actually, nevermind.  If you pay your accountant 60k a year, why should I explain this for free?
    A good accountant is just as costly as a good lawyer. But they always save you more than they cost you. If not well...

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,124
    Image result for star citizen meme
    Arglebargle

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer



  • TalonsinTalonsin Member EpicPosts: 3,619
    Orinori said:
     
    Any time I have looked at those with my accountant it paints a rather healthy picture for the UK office, but that's not much of a surprise.

    LOL!  What BS.  Have you no shame?  Will you go to any length to defend your precious Chris Roberts?  Are we really to believe that you have an account look over the financial reports of a private game company. 

    All I can say is you need to stop lying so much or get a better accountant.  At least Erillion makes a bit of sense when he points out that there are other companies and one company out of 19 can not be used to judge the whole.  That financial statement is horrible and no way would that company stay solvent by itself.  They generate no revenue, have little cash reserves and have a large amount of debt.  Any accountant that tells you that statement paints a healthy picture is on crack but I would assume you must be sharing it with him to post such a blatant lie.

    Pingu2012MaxBacon
    "Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game."  - SEANMCAD

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018
    Talonsin said:
    Orinori said:
     
    Any time I have looked at those with my accountant it paints a rather healthy picture for the UK office, but that's not much of a surprise.

    LOL!  What BS.  Have you no shame?  Will you go to any length to defend your precious Chris Roberts?  Are we really to believe that you have an account look over the financial reports of a private game company. 

    All I can say is you need to stop lying so much or get a better accountant.  At least Erillion makes a bit of sense when he points out that there are other companies and one company out of 19 can not be used to judge the whole.  That financial statement is horrible and no way would that company stay solvent by itself.  They generate no revenue, have little cash reserves and have a large amount of debt.  Any accountant that tells you that statement paints a healthy picture is on crack but I would assume you must be sharing it with him to post such a blatant lie.


    Yea.  As I've mentioned in other threads, I'm also an accountant (certified, too.  That's not easy to get).  Those financials imply a bad situation despite what the layman non-accountant's view of it is, although from this thread Chris's shell game with all those companies clearly did its job in tricking them, at least.  Certainly we don't have the full picture because of the shell game, but the implications are bad enough (as is the fact that there's a shell game in the first place)

    I could go into more detail explaining the financials bit by bit, but again, at that point, why should I literally do my job for FREE?  I've already given my opinon on the matter. For the details, we accountants don't come cheap, and apparently for good reason considering the ideas and views these non-accountants got from these financials.  So like, whatever.

    I will clarify this though.  When I said to Orinori, "Seriously, you need to give them more money", I MEANT IT.

    SERIOUSLY.

    You and the rest of the backers need to give them more money!

    But you keep on thinking I'm only saying that because I'm sarcastically saying "You're the enemy.".  I'm NOT.

    THEY. NEED. YOUR MONEY.


    (although really, the tank and land sales should have been a more than obvious enough indication of that)
    laseritScotchUp
  • OrinoriOrinori Member RarePosts: 751
    edited January 2018
    Talonsin said:
    Orinori said:
     
    Any time I have looked at those with my accountant it paints a rather healthy picture for the UK office, but that's not much of a surprise.

    LOL!  What BS.  Have you no shame?  Will you go to any length to defend your precious Chris Roberts?  Are we really to believe that you have an account look over the financial reports of a private game company. 

    All I can say is you need to stop lying so much or get a better accountant.  At least Erillion makes a bit of sense when he points out that there are other companies and one company out of 19 can not be used to judge the whole.  That financial statement is horrible and no way would that company stay solvent by itself.  They generate no revenue, have little cash reserves and have a large amount of debt.  Any accountant that tells you that statement paints a healthy picture is on crack but I would assume you must be sharing it with him to post such a blatant lie.

    I have not looked at this one, I said anytime I have looked at these (as in returns) they were fine but that was not a surprise due to the fact they can shift stuff around if they feel like it because of the other companies (hint I also mentioned was only 1 part) meaning good or bad the info is useless which is why I use the other indicators :)

    Interesting that you assume my accountant is a he, I will be sure to let her know what a lovely person you are :D


    Post edited by Orinori on
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,235
    Tiamat64 said:

    Yea.  As I've mentioned in other threads, I'm also an accountant (certified, too.  That's not easy to get).  Those financials imply a bad situation despite what the layman non-accountant's view of it is, although from this thread Chris's shell game with all those companies clearly did its job in tricking them, at least.

    But again, at this point, why should I literally do my job for FREE?  We accountants don't come cheap, and apparently for good reason considering the ideas and views these non-accountants got from these financials.  So like, whatever.

    I will clarify this though.  When I said to Orinori, "Seriously, you need to give them more money", I MEANT IT.

    SERIOUSLY.

    You and the rest of the backers need to give them more money!

    But you keep on thinking I'm only saying that because I'm sarcastically saying "You're the enemy.".  I'm NOT.

    THEY. NEED. YOUR MONEY.


    (although really, the tank and land sales should have been a more than obvious enough indication of that)
    So ... you base this - your professional recommendation - on the limited information available?

    A single report from one of a dozen linked companies, with Foundry 42 UK not even being the "central" company ?
    Without inside knowledge about the companies involved and the way they internally transfer money ?
    Without knowledge about their schemes for minimizing tax and currency conversion fees ? Without knowledge about their state-subsidised facilitations?


    Have fun
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    Erillion said:
    Tiamat64 said:

    Yea.  As I've mentioned in other threads, I'm also an accountant (certified, too.  That's not easy to get).  Those financials imply a bad situation despite what the layman non-accountant's view of it is, although from this thread Chris's shell game with all those companies clearly did its job in tricking them, at least.

    But again, at this point, why should I literally do my job for FREE?  We accountants don't come cheap, and apparently for good reason considering the ideas and views these non-accountants got from these financials.  So like, whatever.

    I will clarify this though.  When I said to Orinori, "Seriously, you need to give them more money", I MEANT IT.

    SERIOUSLY.

    You and the rest of the backers need to give them more money!

    But you keep on thinking I'm only saying that because I'm sarcastically saying "You're the enemy.".  I'm NOT.

    THEY. NEED. YOUR MONEY.


    (although really, the tank and land sales should have been a more than obvious enough indication of that)
    So ... you base this - your professional recommendation - on the limited information available?

    A single report from one of a dozen linked companies, with Foundry 42 UK not even being the "central" company ?
    Without inside knowledge about the companies involved and the way they internally transfer money ?
    Without knowledge about their schemes for minimizing tax and currency conversion fees ? Without knowledge about their state-subsidised facilitations?


    Have fun

    If you want my professional recommendation which requires further digging, then you'd have to pay me for it.

    This is just the initial freebie off-the-cuft recommendation.
    ScotchUp
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,235
    edited January 2018
    Tiamat64 said:

    If you want my professional recommendation which requires further digging, then you'd have to pay me for it.

    This is just the initial freebie off-the-cuft recommendation.
    If this is your recommendation and the way you work ....

    Thank you !

    I'll pass.


    Have fun
    Orinori
  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,537
    edited January 2018
    Erillion said:
    Tiamat64 said:

    If you want my professional recommendation which requires further digging, then you'd have to pay me for it.

    This is just the initial freebie off-the-cuft recommendation.
    If this is your recommendation and the way you work ....

    Thank you !

    I'll pass.


    Have fun

    Again, if you want me to do things the way I work, you'd have to actually pay me for it.

    But that's fine.  You can keep supporting Star Citizen.  At this point I'm more confident than ever that the truth will come out soon enough anyways.  And that's what really matters.
    ScotchUp
Sign In or Register to comment.