Whoever financed Vanguard are total morons

Axel · 02-13-2007, 03:13 PM

I'm quoting brad when he explained there were 'financial realities' and this probably wasn't his words. They were shoved down his throat by whoever provided the loan for development of vanguard (SOE?, i know they financed server-side operations..)

I'll put this in simple terms, there is no way the investor will see a good return (or break even for a long time) from vanguard's loan since they demanded to release this game. Why?

When you total all the expenses involved with developing an MMO (according to brad - VG was one of the most expensive MMO's to date), it usually takes a few years to break even. That is if the subscriber base remains stable and theres ample box sales.

Vanguard is not doing well ENOUGH on box sales to even come close to paying off the debt for making this game.

So I ask, why the hell did their financial advisors demand to release a game that wasn't ready when they aren't going to see a good return on their investment (atleast for a while) AND also not break even for some time? The rate vanguard is going, the money put into creating this game won't get paid off for 5 years. My guess is that whoever provided funds to make this game is going to lose money. You really only get one chance with an MMO.

To VG's finance company: If you invested a few more months of developement dollars into this game, you would see a better return at a faster rate than you are now. Stupid.

Jacosta · 02-13-2007, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

I wish I worked for Forbes Magazine, but I don't know anything.

Thank you for the in-depth Forbes analysis on the state of game sales. I'm pretty sure that you stood in every retail shop on and offline checking every single sale of a copy of the game.... Oh wait it's just more of your usual bullshit of pulling numbers out of your ass.

Worf · 02-13-2007, 03:17 PM

Burn!!

Baldar · 02-13-2007, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

I'm quoting brad when he explained there were 'financial realities' and this probably wasn't his words. They were shoved down his throat by whoever provided the loan for development of vanguard (SOE?, i know they financed server-side operations..)

I'll put this in simple terms, there is no way the investor will see a good return (or break even for a long time) from vanguard's loan since they demanded to release this game. Why?

I don't know who the investors are, or if it makes sense. But, maybe they wanted to cut their losses? Maybe they thought the game was good enough to turn a profit in its current state? Who knows, but neither you are I are sitting in the investors chair. Maybe someday Brad will write a book on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

When you total all the expenses involved with developing an MMO (according to brad - VG was one of the most expensive MMO's to date), it usually takes a few years to break even. That is if the subscriber base remains stable and theres ample box sales.

Vanguard is not doing well ENOUGH on box sales to even come close to paying off the debt for making this game.

So I ask, why the hell did their financial advisors demand to release a game that wasn't ready when they aren't going to see a good return on their investment (atleast for a while) AND also not break even for some time? The rate vanguard is going, the money put into creating this game won't get paid off for 5 years. My guess is that whoever provided funds to make this game is going to lose money. You really only get one chance with an MMO.

To VG's finance company: If you invested a few more months of developement dollars into this game, you would see a better return at a faster rate than you are now. Stupid.

You have the ROI graphs on hand you can e-mail to me? How about the sales charts? Subscriber charts? GL from Sigil for the last few years? Sales forcast analysis?

I thought not... (I don't really need to wait for your answer, because the only person who would have EVERY document listed there is Brad, and Smedley may have seen them or have a copy himself if he's helping Brad at all on the business end of things)

ThreadKiller · 02-13-2007, 03:21 PM

another long on words, short on facts post.....yeah.

Dazzler Desiderare · 02-13-2007, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacosta

Oh wait it's just more of your usual bullshit of pulling numbers out of your ass.

Sounds about right! We have a winner!

perfect · 02-13-2007, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacosta

...Oh wait it's just more of your usual bullshit of pulling numbers out of your ass.

78.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Axel · 02-13-2007, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perfect

78.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

I'm making a simple generalization - if their investor dumped 2-3 more months of funds into this game, it would have a healthier return. bottom line.
Sigil needed the extra 2-3 months to stomp out the bugs that people are all bitching about now (of course they would find something else to bitch about) but atleast the game's general functionality would be working.

Since this game started off on the wrong foot and received alot of bad publicity, its only gonna spread and we all know how horizons and SWG turned out. EMPTY. I wish it wasn't the case but this is a business. If you're in a business, you should make sure your product is ready to generate money.

Jacosta · 02-13-2007, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

I'm making a simple generalization

We've already established that you know absolutely nothing about the sales of the game nor the current subscribers. This makes your entire thread one big I'm pulling shit out of my ass to whine at Sigil.™

perfect · 02-13-2007, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

I'm making a simple generalization - if their investor dumped 2-3 more months of funds into this game, it would have a healthier return. bottom line.
Sigil needed the extra 2-3 months to stomp out the bugs that people are all bitching about now (of course they would find something else to bitch about) but atleast the game's general functionality would be working.

Since this game started off on the wrong foot and received alot of bad publicity, its only gonna spread and we all know how horizons and SWG turned out. EMPTY. I wish it wasn't the case but this is a business. If you're in a business, you should make sure your product is ready to generate money.

58.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Atoyota · 02-13-2007, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perfect

78.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

LOL

ThreadKiller · 02-13-2007, 05:39 PM

72.7% of troll posts account for 82.1% of all posts.

TK....commited to proglonging the agony.

Trystan365 · 02-13-2007, 07:26 PM

82.538% of people who, without knowledge of the investment disclosure agreement, assume that folks who financed a company are morons are, themselves, unable to rub two brain cells together to create a spark of anything approaching wit and sagacity.

ThreadKiller · 02-13-2007, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trystan365

82.538% of people who, without knowledge of the investment disclosure agreement, assume that folks who financed a company are morons are, themselves, unable to rub two brain cells together to create a spark of anything approaching wit and sagacity.

ooohhh, sagacity......

but I totally agree.

Riggin · 02-13-2007, 07:30 PM

38% of made up statistics are made of marshmallows according to a pie chart I just made.

-Riggin

Committed. Period. Or I should be.

Bregalad · 02-13-2007, 10:53 PM

I am quite sure the decision to release was not financial. The developers determined that further beta was serving no purpose, and game was sufficiently functional. When an MMO goes live, many things begin happening that have no chance to happen in beta. In particular, 'beta testers' who would catalogue found bugs for personal use rather than report them to dev team, always rush to cash in on those bugs - at which point REAL debugging can begin. It pretty much guarantees a rocky start for any MMO - at least until companies find a way to employ beta testers with a shred of integrity.

I'll tell you this: I have 10+ years experience at a major financial information and analysis company, but without access to exact financial data, I would not hazard ANY assumptions concerning Sigil finance picture.

Elyan · 02-14-2007, 08:56 AM

so this whole thread is about pulling numbers out of your ass? its a neat trick but how did they get up ther in the first place?

ThreadKiller · 02-14-2007, 11:18 AM

It's not the whole thread, it's approximately 33.7% of the thread.

ThreadKiller.....100% committed to prolonging the agony.

Geldoff · 02-14-2007, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axel

I'm quoting brad when he explained there were 'financial realities' and this probably wasn't his words. They were shoved down his throat by whoever provided the loan for development of vanguard (SOE?, i know they financed server-side operations..)

I'll put this in simple terms, there is no way the investor will see a good return (or break even for a long time) from vanguard's loan since they demanded to release this game. Why?

. . .

To VG's finance company: If you invested a few more months of developement dollars into this game, you would see a better return at a faster rate than you are now. Stupid.

Well I was going to start by explaining the difference between a loan and an investment. Then it dawned on me that having a conversation about economics with someone who doesnt already know the difference is a pretty large waste of my time. Sorry, I already waste enough time on this board.

Just so you know orginially the publisher was Microsoft (with thier famous comment "were not an open checkbook [unless you are developing for the 360]", someone would have had to purchase the game back from Microsoft before SOE ever even got involved.

Estefan · 02-15-2007, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad McQuaid

The game has SO much potential

*sigh*