I said substantial. Learn to read. Eitherway, your "demonstarbly" (lol) eloquent rebuttal is false. Funcom built AoC from debt and not from existing equity. And private/public equity offerings right now would absolutely kill Funcom right now. They are bleeding cash. Jesus Christ...who are you people? Just because you play MMORPG's and are a nerd does not make you smart. Stop pretending to be financial analysts...especially when you can't delineate revenue from incurred debt. Lit
Pompous arrogance at its finest, well done.
Fair enough. I'm not used to people disagreeing with me. And when people do I tend to get angry and lose my conciliatory attitude.
Erm, I thought you said you were a lawyer? Don't people argue with you all day?
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
I said substantial. Learn to read. Eitherway, your "demonstarbly" (lol) eloquent rebuttal is false. Funcom built AoC from debt and not from existing equity. And private/public equity offerings right now would absolutely kill Funcom right now. They are bleeding cash. Jesus Christ...who are you people? Just because you play MMORPG's and are a nerd does not make you smart. Stop pretending to be financial analysts...especially when you can't delineate revenue from incurred debt. Lit
Pompous arrogance at its finest, well done.
Fair enough. I'm not used to people disagreeing with me. And when people do I tend to get angry and lose my conciliatory attitude.
Erm, I thought you said you were a lawyer? Don't people argue with you all day?
Litgator_AB, are you working for an organization that is employed by Funcom, has interests (financial or other) in Funcom (including advertisement money and others)? If not, are you directly employed by Funcom?
I said substantial. Learn to read. Eitherway, your "demonstarbly" (lol) eloquent rebuttal is false. Funcom built AoC from debt and not from existing equity. And private/public equity offerings right now would absolutely kill Funcom right now. They are bleeding cash. Jesus Christ...who are you people? Just because you play MMORPG's and are a nerd does not make you smart. Stop pretending to be financial analysts...especially when you can't delineate revenue from incurred debt. Lit
Pompous arrogance at its finest, well done.
Fair enough. I'm not used to people disagreeing with me. And when people do I tend to get angry and lose my conciliatory attitude.
Erm, I thought you said you were a lawyer? Don't people argue with you all day?
No. I do not do much litigation.
No offense but I can see why. The way you talk down to people here as if they're just peon-serfs is insulting. And for me personally, when I see someone doing that to people I just tune them out as it creates a serious credibility issue. And on top of that, you just joined today which makes me wonder what your agenda is here.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Litigator_AB, refer to the following post: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/194842 At the bottom I pose this question to you: Litgator_AB, are you working for an organization that is employed by Funcom, has interests (financial or other) in Funcom (including advertisement money and others)? If not, are you directly employed by Funcom?
Dude read the post. I shorted Funcom. Do you know what shorting is? Let me explain:
Some dude in Norway owns Funcom stock. It is held at a discount broker. I took his stock and I sold it on the open market. Now see, I owe this guy 5000 shares. Do I want to buy his shares back at $8 NOK? Or do I want to buy them back at $30 NOK? Puzzle over that for a while.
So yes, I have an interest in Funcom. I want Funcom to go insolvent. To die. To have their servers all blow up simultaneously. That'd be splendid. Harsh I know. But that doesn't change the fact that AoC has 415,000 customers as of August 14. Sorry if that really pisses you off for some unknown reason.
yes but out of the 415k subs, how many canceled only to have funcom sneak in another sub under the radar? just because a few people noticed them do this doesnt mean it ended with just the people who noticed. im sure there are thousands they decided to double charge. they are fully aware people could charge back but that would take a couple of months to go through. dont matter though cause the investors are not buying that financial report either. take a look at their stocks...dropped down to $16.30 a share today after that report was released. investors know bullshit when they see it too and the fact funcom is basically calling the people who financed them a bunch of idiots (like us players).
I realize people were a bit surprised to see 415,000 customers listed in the Q2 report and presentation.
But now that the dust has settled, if you factor in buddy keys, current box sales (those who have not yet had their CC billed), double billing, those who have cancelled but are still considered customers (which would be a majority of cancellations from July 15th on) and the fact that AoC was doing well in June, you realize the absolute catastrophic state of the game.
Quite literally there is a 3-4 week window where AoC has lost anywhere from 200,000-300,000 customers. We are talking 10,000 people cancelling a day.
I think people didn't (myself included) factor in properly that it had sold 800,000 units. It will take more than 3 months for the game to completely implode. Like...6 months.
Lit
Reading through your posts, I'm personally starting to believe to 14th August as well, especially if we consider cancelled, buddy accounts etc. are accounted in.
Litigator_AB, refer to the following post: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/194842 At the bottom I pose this question to you: Litgator_AB, are you working for an organization that is employed by Funcom, has interests (financial or other) in Funcom (including advertisement money and others)? If not, are you directly employed by Funcom?
Dude read the post. I shorted Funcom. Do you know what shorting is? Let me explain:
Some dude in Norway owns Funcom stock. It is held at a discount broker. I took his stock and I sold it on the open market. Now see, I owe this guy 5000 shares. Do I want to buy his shares back at $8 NOK? Or do I want to buy them back at $30 NOK? Puzzle over that for a while.
So yes, I have an interest in Funcom. I want Funcom to go insolvent. To die. To have their servers all blow up simultaneously. That'd be splendid. Harsh I know. But that doesn't change the fact that AoC has 415,000 customers as of August 14. Sorry if that really pisses you off for some unknown reason.
Lit
I dunno why but i would be interested in knowing why you created an account today and made 45 posts non stop to share your "wisdom" on how funcom did not lie on their report and keep playing a "shill" part for Funcom.
Yep and trying to say you shorted funcom so you must be telling the truth just digs a deeper ditch. I have no idea why someone would come here and try to spin things other than somehow working for Funcom or being a fanboy of AOC but it is pretty obvious when you create an account the day of the thread and post over 40 times on the same subject.
The game has roughly the same number of servers as LOTRO and roughly the same type of server populations and probably roughly the same number of subscriptions, in the 100K-200K range somewhere, maybe 250K if it is more popular in EU than the US. The fact they had 700K accounts created on June 30th and the server population and xfire playtimes were down almost 50% just adds way too much weight to that 415K account number being a June 30th number. There is no way they still have over 50% retention as of August 14th, no way in heck.
Introduction: First of all, I am not going to discuss the validity of the 415,000 subscription number. They realize their playerbase has been truncated substantially and Funcom will for the next 3 months be trying their absolute best to salvage AoC. And that is another reason why they are not going to provide financial guidance in future quarters. What they will attempt to do is hit the low end of their Q3 revenue guidance (16 million) while significantly lowering their expenses through the downsizing of their main costs: advertising and promotion. Their revenue guidance is an interesting snapshot into their future. 1. 16-20 million in Q3 revenue (excluding Plutolife) means they expect subscriptions from AoC over the next 3 months to = ~13.5 million - 17.5 million dollars. (Subtract from the 16-20 million anticipated revenues 1.5 million from previous Funcom revenue streams (AO and cellular services) and 1 million from AoC box/digital sales. This data is taken from previous quarters prior to AoC's release and a guess regarding future box sales. Realize if box/digital sales are better than this the following subscription scenario will be worse and not better. 2. We will use the low-end snapshot of this revenue prediction to mimic what Funcom actually expects. It is telling that their financial guidance fluctuated 400% in one quarter and obviously accounts for the serious situation AoC faces. 3. We will use their financial guidance and estimate revenue of 13.5-17.5 million from subscriptions for Q3. Substantially this will be subscription periods ranging from July 15 - July 30, August 15 - August 30, and September 15 - September 30. Realize these are just snapshots in time...we are trying to figure out how Funcom anticipates their subscriptions to run in Q3. 4. We will assume 415,000 subscriptions is accurate for August 14th. As you will soon see, no matter the truth/accuracy of this statement, Funcom is in a serious bind. Analysis: There are two assumptions I make in this analysis. That Funcom is bleeding subscribers continuously. If you disagree with this assessment, ignore this post. Moreover, as per point 4, I assume that 415,000 subscribers is a snapshot in time as of August 14th. a) If Funcom had 415,000 subscribers yesterday then, according to assumption one, Funcom had a larger subscription pool July 15-30 (our first month in the three month snapshot in time). We will estimate this number to be 500,000-600,000 @ 14 USD a month. 14 USD is a reflection of monthly subscription costs being lowered due to longer subscriptions. It does not include expenses such as credit card transaction costs and other distribution rights to revenue (whatever those may be). Those costs are detailed in operating expenses. Revenue from this month's stream will be between 7 million and 8.4 million USD. b) If Funcom had 415,000 active subscriptions as of August 14th then according to assumption one the August 15 - August 30 snapshot will be less. We will estimate 350,000-400,000 (less variance due to the explicit number given in the report). The revenue from this is between 4.9 million and 5.6 million USD. This leaves us with an anticipation of what Funcom expects from Q3. The variance established is between 11.9 million USD and 14 million USD from two months in Q3. To reach their revenue projections, using our lowest variance to reach their lowest guidance, and vice versa, September 15 - September 30 will result in revenues of 2.1 million USD to 3.5 million USD. Translated into subscriptions, it means Funcom is anticipating 150,000 to 250,000 active, paying accounts by the end of September. Conclusion: This does not bode well for Funcom. If Funcom had 415,000 subscriptions as of August 14, 2008 then Funcom is expecting massive attrition in the upcoming months. If the number is subscriptions as of June 30 the picture is quite a bit brighter and they are estimating ~300,000 subscriptions as of the end of September 30. If not, and the numbers are indeed from August 14, the number anticipated is closer to 200,000 +- 50,000. These numbers assume Funcom hits its revenue targets. Prognosis: 1. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 1 million dollars (15 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~225,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 75,000-175,000 2. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 2 million dollars (14 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~150,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 20,000-100,000 Disclosure: I have a substantial short position with regards to Funcom. Lit
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=FUNCOM.OL&t=5d&l=on&z=m&q=l&c this was posted on another thread it shows funcoms stock drops . the facts speak for themselves . i gather from what people have been saying funcom are losing about 5 million dollars a month if that is the case its hard to see how long they can keep going and i wonder what the future for age of conan holds if funcom do go under . i would like to think for all those that brought it and are enjoying it that some other company might take it over but i would nt bet on it espeacially with all the competition coming out later this year . it ll be interesing to see what happens .
Funcom is losing about ~2 million a month, not 5 million. A lot of those expenses are one-time massive advertising expenses as well.
Funcom also has 36 million dollars in cash. Look for Funcom to pull in the reigns on AoC expenses the next 6 weeks to reduce their losses and attempt to break even this quarter (won't happen, but it will be suprisingly close...EBIT of ~2 million)
Lit
well i guess that gives them some time to turn things around . although after the the massive advertising and initial sales i would say this is about as good as it will get and i m not sure 415,000 customers is that great under the circumstances . realistically i think it will level out at 150 ,000 - 250,000 regular players at any one time .
i know people who are enjoying conan a lot and have got to level 80 and would like to stay but finding the endgame a bit limited and are already looking to warhammer . its hard to say what effect it will have on the existing mmos . warcraft will be able to weather its inevitable loses due to the sheer numbers it has playing . i doubt niche games like coh, eve , lotro and ddo will feel much of an effect but age of conan is in the weakest position of all mmos given players have only had a few months to integrate themselve into what it has to offer . the subscriber base needs to rise above what it is now .
a lot of weather conan rises or falls is based on warhammer and how good or bad a game that turns out to be .
Introduction: First of all, I am not going to discuss the validity of the 415,000 subscription number. They realize their playerbase has been truncated substantially and Funcom will for the next 3 months be trying their absolute best to salvage AoC. And that is another reason why they are not going to provide financial guidance in future quarters. What they will attempt to do is hit the low end of their Q3 revenue guidance (16 million) while significantly lowering their expenses through the downsizing of their main costs: advertising and promotion. Their revenue guidance is an interesting snapshot into their future. 1. 16-20 million in Q3 revenue (excluding Plutolife) means they expect subscriptions from AoC over the next 3 months to = ~13.5 million - 17.5 million dollars. (Subtract from the 16-20 million anticipated revenues 1.5 million from previous Funcom revenue streams (AO and cellular services) and 1 million from AoC box/digital sales. This data is taken from previous quarters prior to AoC's release and a guess regarding future box sales. Realize if box/digital sales are better than this the following subscription scenario will be worse and not better. 2. We will use the low-end snapshot of this revenue prediction to mimic what Funcom actually expects. It is telling that their financial guidance fluctuated 400% in one quarter and obviously accounts for the serious situation AoC faces. 3. We will use their financial guidance and estimate revenue of 13.5-17.5 million from subscriptions for Q3. Substantially this will be subscription periods ranging from July 15 - July 30, August 15 - August 30, and September 15 - September 30. Realize these are just snapshots in time...we are trying to figure out how Funcom anticipates their subscriptions to run in Q3. 4. We will assume 415,000 subscriptions is accurate for August 14th. As you will soon see, no matter the truth/accuracy of this statement, Funcom is in a serious bind. Analysis: There are two assumptions I make in this analysis. That Funcom is bleeding subscribers continuously. If you disagree with this assessment, ignore this post. Moreover, as per point 4, I assume that 415,000 subscribers is a snapshot in time as of August 14th. a) If Funcom had 415,000 subscribers yesterday then, according to assumption one, Funcom had a larger subscription pool July 15-30 (our first month in the three month snapshot in time). We will estimate this number to be 500,000-600,000 @ 14 USD a month. 14 USD is a reflection of monthly subscription costs being lowered due to longer subscriptions. It does not include expenses such as credit card transaction costs and other distribution rights to revenue (whatever those may be). Those costs are detailed in operating expenses. Revenue from this month's stream will be between 7 million and 8.4 million USD. b) If Funcom had 415,000 active subscriptions as of August 14th then according to assumption one the August 15 - August 30 snapshot will be less. We will estimate 350,000-400,000 (less variance due to the explicit number given in the report). The revenue from this is between 4.9 million and 5.6 million USD. This leaves us with an anticipation of what Funcom expects from Q3. The variance established is between 11.9 million USD and 14 million USD from two months in Q3. To reach their revenue projections, using our lowest variance to reach their lowest guidance, and vice versa, September 15 - September 30 will result in revenues of 2.1 million USD to 3.5 million USD. Translated into subscriptions, it means Funcom is anticipating 150,000 to 250,000 active, paying accounts by the end of September. Conclusion: This does not bode well for Funcom. If Funcom had 415,000 subscriptions as of August 14, 2008 then Funcom is expecting massive attrition in the upcoming months. If the number is subscriptions as of June 30 the picture is quite a bit brighter and they are estimating ~300,000 subscriptions as of the end of September 30. If not, and the numbers are indeed from August 14, the number anticipated is closer to 200,000 +- 50,000. These numbers assume Funcom hits its revenue targets. Prognosis: 1. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 1 million dollars (15 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~225,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 75,000-175,000 2. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 2 million dollars (14 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~150,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 20,000-100,000 Disclosure: I have a substantial short position with regards to Funcom. Lit
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
thats actually a very good point . how much of fucoms future is based on aoc ? its not unheard of for a big coporation to invest heavily in the wrong thing and find themselves in a weakend position so much they are taken over or swallowed up by bigger fish in the pond . i would nt like to say your being naive but in reality this sort of thing happens a lot . theres a lot of factors come into the equation i m sure funcom diversify its investments but it really depends on how these offset against potential loses on an unsuccesful venture (not saying that aoc will be but it could be) .
like i said in my previous post it will be interesting to see what happens .... personally i think we ll see funcom merge with another company next year . that will speak volumes .
Introduction: First of all, I am not going to discuss the validity of the 415,000 subscription number. They realize their playerbase has been truncated substantially and Funcom will for the next 3 months be trying their absolute best to salvage AoC. And that is another reason why they are not going to provide financial guidance in future quarters. What they will attempt to do is hit the low end of their Q3 revenue guidance (16 million) while significantly lowering their expenses through the downsizing of their main costs: advertising and promotion. Their revenue guidance is an interesting snapshot into their future. 1. 16-20 million in Q3 revenue (excluding Plutolife) means they expect subscriptions from AoC over the next 3 months to = ~13.5 million - 17.5 million dollars. (Subtract from the 16-20 million anticipated revenues 1.5 million from previous Funcom revenue streams (AO and cellular services) and 1 million from AoC box/digital sales. This data is taken from previous quarters prior to AoC's release and a guess regarding future box sales. Realize if box/digital sales are better than this the following subscription scenario will be worse and not better. 2. We will use the low-end snapshot of this revenue prediction to mimic what Funcom actually expects. It is telling that their financial guidance fluctuated 400% in one quarter and obviously accounts for the serious situation AoC faces. 3. We will use their financial guidance and estimate revenue of 13.5-17.5 million from subscriptions for Q3. Substantially this will be subscription periods ranging from July 15 - July 30, August 15 - August 30, and September 15 - September 30. Realize these are just snapshots in time...we are trying to figure out how Funcom anticipates their subscriptions to run in Q3. 4. We will assume 415,000 subscriptions is accurate for August 14th. As you will soon see, no matter the truth/accuracy of this statement, Funcom is in a serious bind. Analysis: There are two assumptions I make in this analysis. That Funcom is bleeding subscribers continuously. If you disagree with this assessment, ignore this post. Moreover, as per point 4, I assume that 415,000 subscribers is a snapshot in time as of August 14th. a) If Funcom had 415,000 subscribers yesterday then, according to assumption one, Funcom had a larger subscription pool July 15-30 (our first month in the three month snapshot in time). We will estimate this number to be 500,000-600,000 @ 14 USD a month. 14 USD is a reflection of monthly subscription costs being lowered due to longer subscriptions. It does not include expenses such as credit card transaction costs and other distribution rights to revenue (whatever those may be). Those costs are detailed in operating expenses. Revenue from this month's stream will be between 7 million and 8.4 million USD. b) If Funcom had 415,000 active subscriptions as of August 14th then according to assumption one the August 15 - August 30 snapshot will be less. We will estimate 350,000-400,000 (less variance due to the explicit number given in the report). The revenue from this is between 4.9 million and 5.6 million USD. This leaves us with an anticipation of what Funcom expects from Q3. The variance established is between 11.9 million USD and 14 million USD from two months in Q3. To reach their revenue projections, using our lowest variance to reach their lowest guidance, and vice versa, September 15 - September 30 will result in revenues of 2.1 million USD to 3.5 million USD. Translated into subscriptions, it means Funcom is anticipating 150,000 to 250,000 active, paying accounts by the end of September. Conclusion: This does not bode well for Funcom. If Funcom had 415,000 subscriptions as of August 14, 2008 then Funcom is expecting massive attrition in the upcoming months. If the number is subscriptions as of June 30 the picture is quite a bit brighter and they are estimating ~300,000 subscriptions as of the end of September 30. If not, and the numbers are indeed from August 14, the number anticipated is closer to 200,000 +- 50,000. These numbers assume Funcom hits its revenue targets. Prognosis: 1. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 1 million dollars (15 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~225,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 75,000-175,000 2. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 2 million dollars (14 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~150,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 20,000-100,000 Disclosure: I have a substantial short position with regards to Funcom. Lit
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
thats actually a very good point . how much of fucoms future is based on aoc ? its not unheard of for a big coporation to invest heavily in the wrong thing and find themselves in a weakend position so much they are taken over or swallowed up by bigger fish in the pond . i would nt like to say your being naive but in reality this sort of thing happens a lot . theres a lot of factors come into the equation i m sure funcom diversify its investments but it really depends on how these offset against potential loses on an unsuccesful venture (not saying that aoc will be but it could be) .
like i said in my previous post it will be interesting to see what happens .... personally i think we ll see funcom merge with another company next year . that will speak volumes .
More assumptions?
Just stop already.
These threads just generate nothing more than speculation.I do find it entertaining though that people will post paragraphs on subject matter they really have no clue about.
Nobody but FC knows how AoC is performing.FC employees are the only people who really know how AoC is doing.
and yet dear Mr. OP you post this posts anyways... What really is interesting is the Blizzard'hs chairman was out saying that yes, we do see people leaving to try out AoC, 40% of them returns to us. That actually means that 60% doesnt return but stay in AoC. Thats a lot. Funcom must have done something right in that game.
I left WoW to play AoC. Now I play neither (actually, taking a break from MMOs now completely and putting the free time to good use learning Japanese).
I'll give WAR a shot and watch for other dark horse titles with potential, but AoC's failures put the finishing touches on my MMORPG burn out.
In any event, it's completely invalid to assume that most of those who left WoW and haven't returned are actually still playing AoC.
Introduction: First of all, I am not going to discuss the validity of the 415,000 subscription number. They realize their playerbase has been truncated substantially and Funcom will for the next 3 months be trying their absolute best to salvage AoC. And that is another reason why they are not going to provide financial guidance in future quarters. What they will attempt to do is hit the low end of their Q3 revenue guidance (16 million) while significantly lowering their expenses through the downsizing of their main costs: advertising and promotion. Their revenue guidance is an interesting snapshot into their future. 1. 16-20 million in Q3 revenue (excluding Plutolife) means they expect subscriptions from AoC over the next 3 months to = ~13.5 million - 17.5 million dollars. (Subtract from the 16-20 million anticipated revenues 1.5 million from previous Funcom revenue streams (AO and cellular services) and 1 million from AoC box/digital sales. This data is taken from previous quarters prior to AoC's release and a guess regarding future box sales. Realize if box/digital sales are better than this the following subscription scenario will be worse and not better. 2. We will use the low-end snapshot of this revenue prediction to mimic what Funcom actually expects. It is telling that their financial guidance fluctuated 400% in one quarter and obviously accounts for the serious situation AoC faces. 3. We will use their financial guidance and estimate revenue of 13.5-17.5 million from subscriptions for Q3. Substantially this will be subscription periods ranging from July 15 - July 30, August 15 - August 30, and September 15 - September 30. Realize these are just snapshots in time...we are trying to figure out how Funcom anticipates their subscriptions to run in Q3. 4. We will assume 415,000 subscriptions is accurate for August 14th. As you will soon see, no matter the truth/accuracy of this statement, Funcom is in a serious bind. Analysis: There are two assumptions I make in this analysis. That Funcom is bleeding subscribers continuously. If you disagree with this assessment, ignore this post. Moreover, as per point 4, I assume that 415,000 subscribers is a snapshot in time as of August 14th. a) If Funcom had 415,000 subscribers yesterday then, according to assumption one, Funcom had a larger subscription pool July 15-30 (our first month in the three month snapshot in time). We will estimate this number to be 500,000-600,000 @ 14 USD a month. 14 USD is a reflection of monthly subscription costs being lowered due to longer subscriptions. It does not include expenses such as credit card transaction costs and other distribution rights to revenue (whatever those may be). Those costs are detailed in operating expenses. Revenue from this month's stream will be between 7 million and 8.4 million USD. b) If Funcom had 415,000 active subscriptions as of August 14th then according to assumption one the August 15 - August 30 snapshot will be less. We will estimate 350,000-400,000 (less variance due to the explicit number given in the report). The revenue from this is between 4.9 million and 5.6 million USD. This leaves us with an anticipation of what Funcom expects from Q3. The variance established is between 11.9 million USD and 14 million USD from two months in Q3. To reach their revenue projections, using our lowest variance to reach their lowest guidance, and vice versa, September 15 - September 30 will result in revenues of 2.1 million USD to 3.5 million USD. Translated into subscriptions, it means Funcom is anticipating 150,000 to 250,000 active, paying accounts by the end of September. Conclusion: This does not bode well for Funcom. If Funcom had 415,000 subscriptions as of August 14, 2008 then Funcom is expecting massive attrition in the upcoming months. If the number is subscriptions as of June 30 the picture is quite a bit brighter and they are estimating ~300,000 subscriptions as of the end of September 30. If not, and the numbers are indeed from August 14, the number anticipated is closer to 200,000 +- 50,000. These numbers assume Funcom hits its revenue targets. Prognosis: 1. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 1 million dollars (15 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~225,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 75,000-175,000 2. If Funcom misses its revenue target by 2 million dollars (14 million USD) a) June 30th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of ~150,000 b) August 14th @ 415,000 subscriptions = September 30 subscriptions of 20,000-100,000 Disclosure: I have a substantial short position with regards to Funcom. Lit
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
thats actually a very good point . how much of fucoms future is based on aoc ? its not unheard of for a big coporation to invest heavily in the wrong thing and find themselves in a weakend position so much they are taken over or swallowed up by bigger fish in the pond . i would nt like to say your being naive but in reality this sort of thing happens a lot . theres a lot of factors come into the equation i m sure funcom diversify its investments but it really depends on how these offset against potential loses on an unsuccesful venture (not saying that aoc will be but it could be) .
like i said in my previous post it will be interesting to see what happens .... personally i think we ll see funcom merge with another company next year . that will speak volumes .
More assumptions?
Just stop already.
These threads just generate nothing more than speculation.I do find it entertaining though that people will post paragraphs on subject matter they really have no clue about.
Nobody but FC knows how AoC is performing.FC employees are the only people who really know how AoC is doing.
Everything else is speculation.
What sets the OP apart from other threads is that the speculation is based on hard numbers and Funcom's own financial projections for next quarter.
Extrapolating from Funcom's numbers shows that they indeed are expecting a significant drop off in subscriptions for next quarter. Yes, their own projections could be wrong to the positive or the negative, but it still gives us an idea how things are looking internally.
Also, the last part of the OP does provide us a valid metric to judge subscriptions based on the actual revenue numbers we will see in three months. Funcom may decide not to release subscription figures in the future, but by doing so this quarter they have provided the information necassary to calculate subscriptions based on revenue.
Funcom has painted itself right into a corner.
What pains me the most about this entire fiasco is that we know from last quarter's cash on hand info that they had plenty of cash to continue development, even for another year if necassary. This was not a rush of necessity, it was entirely bad management and faulty decision making.
What sets the OP apart from other threads is that the speculation is based on hard numbers and Funcom's own financial projections for next quarter. Extrapolating from Funcom's numbers shows that they indeed are expecting a significant drop off in subscriptions for next quarter. Yes, their own projections could be wrong to the positive or the negative, but it still gives us an idea how things are looking internally.
Well let me put it like this: I have yet to see an MMO where the subscription numbers did not nosedive after the first initial rush right after release +3 months.
All you can do is to make assumptions or speculations, without any real validity, about future subscription numbers based on the initial wave of new subs against the wave of leaving customers in the first 1-3 months. While there is a rule of thumb that about 30+% of new subscriptions will stay as mid or long-term customers there are no hard facts for that rule. The rate of new subscriptions vs. cancelled subscription after the first 1-3 months is even bigger the more the game gets hyped by the press/company because the expectations of the new players are much higher compared to what the game really can give them.
And the trend for this kind of, eventually, unmet overexpectiations seems to be a new trend for MMOs. Not only AoC had this kind of problem but WAR will most probably go the same route in this regard. Whether this is intended by the developer of said games or if it is something that is more or less forced on them by the fanbase is another, though interesting, story.
I'd put it like that: If AoC can actually keep a more or less steady player base of about 150k-250k subscriptions then they are doing quite well for a new MMO on the market that is currently only present in the US and in Europe. That would put them somewhere between LotRO and EQ2 (based on MMOGCHART.COM). The question is then if this is enough for them or not. But I will be the last one who would want to speculate about something like this. I will leave this to the funny people with the FailCom avatar. They seem to be business analysts by birth and trade
*************************** Remember, remember the 5th of November ***************************
What sets the OP apart from other threads is that the speculation is based on hard numbers and Funcom's own financial projections for next quarter. Extrapolating from Funcom's numbers shows that they indeed are expecting a significant drop off in subscriptions for next quarter. Yes, their own projections could be wrong to the positive or the negative, but it still gives us an idea how things are looking internally.
Well let me put it like this: I have yet to see an MMO where the subscription numbers did not nosedive after the first initial rush right after release +3 months.
All you can do is to make assumptions or speculations, without any real validity, about future subscription numbers based on the initial wave of new subs against the wave of leaving customers in the first 1-3 months. While there is a rule of thumb that about 30+% of new subscriptions will stay as mid or long-term customers there are no hard facts for that rule. The rate of new subscriptions vs. cancelled subscription after the first 1-3 months is even bigger the more the game gets hyped by the press/company because the expectations of the new players are much higher compared to what the game really can give them.
And the trend for this kind of, eventually, unmet overexpectiations seems to be a new trend for MMOs. Not only AoC had this kind of problem but WAR will most probably go the same route in this regard. Whether this is intended by the developer of said games or if it is something that is more or less forced on them by the fanbase is another, though interesting, story.
I'd put it like that: If AoC can actually keep a more or less steady player base of about 150k-250k subscriptions then they are doing quite well for a new MMO on the market that is currently only present in the US and in Europe. That would put them somewhere between LotRO and EQ2 (based on MMOGCHART.COM). The question is then if this is enough for them or not. But I will be the last one who would want to speculate about something like this. I will leave this to the funny people with the FailCom avatar. They seem to be business analysts by birth and trade
First off, they didn't report 'subscribers' they reported customers, which is very different. Their 'customers' include people who are in the first 30 days (free), includes people who download the 'free' trial for $1.99 and probably includes a bunch of other people that no other MMORPG includes. Comparing it to LotRO and EQ2 isn't possible, since those two games use the generally accepted 'rule' of only counting people who have actually subscribed to the game. Other companies (including Blizzard) go out of their way to not include anyone except true subscribers. Funcom on the other hand has been as vague and misleading as possible. 415k AoC customers does not equal 415k LotRO subscribers.
As to you second point that Funcom will be 'ok' with 250k customers. If the company lost 8M when they had 415k subscribers and 8M box sales, how are they ever going to be profitable with just 250k customers and almost no box sales (down below #50 on sales charts). The company does not have the cash on hand to support operations for 6 months. The only option they have it to completely gut their development team, which based on the lack of patches for the past month, is probably what they have done. Do you think this broken game can survive without a dev team.. when compared to WOW and Warhammer?
First off, they didn't report 'subscribers' they reported customers, which is very different. Their 'customers' include people who are in the first 30 days (free), includes people who download the 'free' trial for $1.99 and probably includes a bunch of other people that no other MMORPG includes. Comparing it to LotRO and EQ2 isn't possible, since those two games use the generally accepted 'rule' of only counting people who have actually subscribed to the game. Other companies (including Blizzard) go out of their way to not include anyone except true subscribers. Funcom on the other hand has been as vague and misleading as possible. 415k AoC customers does not equal 415k LotRO subscribers. As to you second point that Funcom will be 'ok' with 250k customers. If the company lost 8M when they had 415k subscribers and 8M box sales, how are they ever going to be profitable with just 250k customers and almost no box sales (down below #50 on sales charts). The company does not have the cash on hand to support operations for 6 months. The only option they have it to completely gut their development team, which based on the lack of patches for the past month, is probably what they have done. Do you think this broken game can survive without a dev team.. when compared to WOW and Warhammer?
Well, as you stated yourself later on in your answer I did not calculate with 400k+ subscriptions but with 250k. I cannot answer if the 250k will be enough to cover past losses based on the development process and its associated costs but I can see that there are games with much lower subscription numbers that are going fine since years and years. We can go from DDO with an estimated 50k subs up to EQ2 with about 250k subs. If those games would not generate a profit then the powers that be would have pulled the plug long ago. MMOs are there to make a profit for a company. Nothing more and nothing less.
So if you ask me if AoC could survive with 250k subs, if those 250k subs are still there in 6 months time, then my answer would be yes, they probably will still be around.
As a side note: Vanguard is still around despite the fact that alot of people already marked it as dead two years ago. Think about that next time you announce the coming death of an MMO. The number of closed down MMOs up to today can be counted on one hand, compared to the amount of up and running MMOs on the market.
As for your last comment about WoW and Warhammer: I wouldn't put WoW and WAR into the same sentence as you did. The game is not even out yet and no one knows if in the end the hype was much bigger than what the released game will give us. Before AoC was released everyone was hyping about AoC being the best, if not only, alternative to WoW. Now after AoC has been released and WAR coming up on the horizon the same thing starts with WAR.
If I've learned one thing in the last few years as an MMO player then it is that overexpectations and hype for an unreleased game will end in tears and anger for most of the time.
*************************** Remember, remember the 5th of November ***************************
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
You know what? Funcom is a penny stock not a global corporation. It's a fly dropping in terms of size. They developed AoC with borrowed money not out of their own pockets full of smart and global investment strategies. They almost went belly up with AO and barely survived.
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
According to the official Q2 report that is exactly what they are doing. I can not find any revenue from other global strategic investments.
"Give players systems and tools instead of rails and rules"
More assumptions? Just stop already. These threads just generate nothing more than speculation.I do find it entertaining though that people will post paragraphs on subject matter they really have no clue about. Nobody but FC knows how AoC is performing.FC employees are the only people who really know how AoC is doing. Everything else is speculation.
All prognostication is based on assumptions. Science is built on assumptions. Ditto with financial analysis.
And Funcom has made it quite clear how it is doing via it's Q2 results and its revenue guidance for Q3. Quite frankly I find it very bold of them to do so (and in many ways stupid). Because if they miss their revenue targets by 1-2 million dollars it means AoC has hemorrhaged another 50-90% of its customer base.
and yet dear Mr. OP you post this posts anyways... What really is interesting is the Blizzard'hs chairman was out saying that yes, we do see people leaving to try out AoC, 40% of them returns to us. That actually means that 60% doesnt return but stay in AoC. Thats a lot. Funcom must have done something right in that game.
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
and yet dear Mr. OP you post this posts anyways... What really is interesting is the Blizzard'hs chairman was out saying that yes, we do see people leaving to try out AoC, 40% of them returns to us. That actually means that 60% doesnt return but stay in AoC. Thats a lot. Funcom must have done something right in that game.
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
Lawl. A 40% return rate is very good considering people are leaving for a new game. Many people are tired of WoW, yet 40% come back? Thats great for Blizz.
and yet dear Mr. OP you post this posts anyways... What really is interesting is the Blizzard'hs chairman was out saying that yes, we do see people leaving to try out AoC, 40% of them returns to us. That actually means that 60% doesnt return but stay in AoC. Thats a lot. Funcom must have done something right in that game.
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
I, and a lot of others, went back to LotRO, after the AoC debacle. Why is it a step backwards to go back to a game you enjoyed? Just because I wanted to try out AoC does not mean that there was, or is, anything wrong with LotRO. Like any other game, some are going to like it, and some aren't. The fact that you referred to a return to LotRO as "such a step backwards" indicates you do not like LotRO. So be it. But, do not assume that because others return to a game YOU do not like means they are stepping backwards. Besides, how do you know they have not "stopped playing [AoC] in anticipation of " Mines of Moria?
Hedonismbot: Your latest performance was as delectable as dipping my bottom over and over into a bath of the silkiest oils and creams.
and yet dear Mr. OP you post this posts anyways... What really is interesting is the Blizzard'hs chairman was out saying that yes, we do see people leaving to try out AoC, 40% of them returns to us. That actually means that 60% doesnt return but stay in AoC. Thats a lot. Funcom must have done something right in that game.
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
I, and a lot of others, went back to LotRO, after the AoC debacle. Why is it a step backwards to go back to a game you enjoyed? Just because I wanted to try out AoC does not mean that there was, or is, anything wrong with LotRO. Like any other game, some are going to like it, and some aren't. The fact that you referred to a return to LotRO as "such a step backwards" indicates you do not like LotRO. So be it. But, do not assume that because others return to a game YOU do not like means they are stepping backwards. Besides, how do you know they have not "stopped playing [AoC] in anticipation of " Mines of Moria?
Lotro is a fine game. But given that you left Lotro to try out Aoc, tells us something, you were tired of Lotro and wanted something new.
Anticipation is what this business is surviving on. Most of the times the anticipiation is not satisfied, just like with AoC. It doesnt mean we all run to the stores and get a copy of "Mines of Moria". IMHO Warhammer will have a good chance of attracting people from the 3 look-alike games (Lotro, Wow and Aoc). But its just an opinion of course, shared by many on these forums, at least until they learn that Warhammer isnt really all that new an exciting, and then they quit that game and start waiting for, who knows. Its simply the way its works.
Comments
Pompous arrogance at its finest, well done.
Fair enough. I'm not used to people disagreeing with me. And when people do I tend to get angry and lose my conciliatory attitude.
Erm, I thought you said you were a lawyer? Don't people argue with you all day?
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Pompous arrogance at its finest, well done.
Fair enough. I'm not used to people disagreeing with me. And when people do I tend to get angry and lose my conciliatory attitude.
Erm, I thought you said you were a lawyer? Don't people argue with you all day?
No. I do not do much litigation.
Litigator_AB, refer to the following post:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/194842
At the bottom I pose this question to you:
Litgator_AB, are you working for an organization that is employed by Funcom, has interests (financial or other) in Funcom (including advertisement money and others)? If not, are you directly employed by Funcom?
splat
Pompous arrogance at its finest, well done.
Fair enough. I'm not used to people disagreeing with me. And when people do I tend to get angry and lose my conciliatory attitude.
Erm, I thought you said you were a lawyer? Don't people argue with you all day?
No. I do not do much litigation.
No offense but I can see why. The way you talk down to people here as if they're just peon-serfs is insulting. And for me personally, when I see someone doing that to people I just tune them out as it creates a serious credibility issue. And on top of that, you just joined today which makes me wonder what your agenda is here.
"Censorship is never over for those who have experienced it. It is a brand on the imagination that affects the individual who has suffered it, forever." - Noam Chomsky
Dude read the post. I shorted Funcom. Do you know what shorting is? Let me explain:
Some dude in Norway owns Funcom stock. It is held at a discount broker. I took his stock and I sold it on the open market. Now see, I owe this guy 5000 shares. Do I want to buy his shares back at $8 NOK? Or do I want to buy them back at $30 NOK? Puzzle over that for a while.
So yes, I have an interest in Funcom. I want Funcom to go insolvent. To die. To have their servers all blow up simultaneously. That'd be splendid. Harsh I know. But that doesn't change the fact that AoC has 415,000 customers as of August 14. Sorry if that really pisses you off for some unknown reason.
Lit
I realize people were a bit surprised to see 415,000 customers listed in the Q2 report and presentation.
But now that the dust has settled, if you factor in buddy keys, current box sales (those who have not yet had their CC billed), double billing, those who have cancelled but are still considered customers (which would be a majority of cancellations from July 15th on) and the fact that AoC was doing well in June, you realize the absolute catastrophic state of the game.
Quite literally there is a 3-4 week window where AoC has lost anywhere from 200,000-300,000 customers. We are talking 10,000 people cancelling a day.
I think people didn't (myself included) factor in properly that it had sold 800,000 units. It will take more than 3 months for the game to completely implode. Like...6 months.
Lit
Reading through your posts, I'm personally starting to believe to 14th August as well, especially if we consider cancelled, buddy accounts etc. are accounted in.
RIP Blackguard. May a resurrection come.
Dude read the post. I shorted Funcom. Do you know what shorting is? Let me explain:
Some dude in Norway owns Funcom stock. It is held at a discount broker. I took his stock and I sold it on the open market. Now see, I owe this guy 5000 shares. Do I want to buy his shares back at $8 NOK? Or do I want to buy them back at $30 NOK? Puzzle over that for a while.
So yes, I have an interest in Funcom. I want Funcom to go insolvent. To die. To have their servers all blow up simultaneously. That'd be splendid. Harsh I know. But that doesn't change the fact that AoC has 415,000 customers as of August 14. Sorry if that really pisses you off for some unknown reason.
Lit
I dunno why but i would be interested in knowing why you created an account today and made 45 posts non stop to share your "wisdom" on how funcom did not lie on their report and keep playing a "shill" part for Funcom.
Yep and trying to say you shorted funcom so you must be telling the truth just digs a deeper ditch. I have no idea why someone would come here and try to spin things other than somehow working for Funcom or being a fanboy of AOC but it is pretty obvious when you create an account the day of the thread and post over 40 times on the same subject.
The game has roughly the same number of servers as LOTRO and roughly the same type of server populations and probably roughly the same number of subscriptions, in the 100K-200K range somewhere, maybe 250K if it is more popular in EU than the US. The fact they had 700K accounts created on June 30th and the server population and xfire playtimes were down almost 50% just adds way too much weight to that 415K account number being a June 30th number. There is no way they still have over 50% retention as of August 14th, no way in heck.
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
What is your physical limit?
Funcom is losing about ~2 million a month, not 5 million. A lot of those expenses are one-time massive advertising expenses as well.
Funcom also has 36 million dollars in cash. Look for Funcom to pull in the reigns on AoC expenses the next 6 weeks to reduce their losses and attempt to break even this quarter (won't happen, but it will be suprisingly close...EBIT of ~2 million)
Lit
well i guess that gives them some time to turn things around . although after the the massive advertising and initial sales i would say this is about as good as it will get and i m not sure 415,000 customers is that great under the circumstances . realistically i think it will level out at 150 ,000 - 250,000 regular players at any one time .
i know people who are enjoying conan a lot and have got to level 80 and would like to stay but finding the endgame a bit limited and are already looking to warhammer . its hard to say what effect it will have on the existing mmos . warcraft will be able to weather its inevitable loses due to the sheer numbers it has playing . i doubt niche games like coh, eve , lotro and ddo will feel much of an effect but age of conan is in the weakest position of all mmos given players have only had a few months to integrate themselve into what it has to offer . the subscriber base needs to rise above what it is now .
a lot of weather conan rises or falls is based on warhammer and how good or bad a game that turns out to be .
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
thats actually a very good point . how much of fucoms future is based on aoc ? its not unheard of for a big coporation to invest heavily in the wrong thing and find themselves in a weakend position so much they are taken over or swallowed up by bigger fish in the pond . i would nt like to say your being naive but in reality this sort of thing happens a lot . theres a lot of factors come into the equation i m sure funcom diversify its investments but it really depends on how these offset against potential loses on an unsuccesful venture (not saying that aoc will be but it could be) .
like i said in my previous post it will be interesting to see what happens .... personally i think we ll see funcom merge with another company next year . that will speak volumes .
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
thats actually a very good point . how much of fucoms future is based on aoc ? its not unheard of for a big coporation to invest heavily in the wrong thing and find themselves in a weakend position so much they are taken over or swallowed up by bigger fish in the pond . i would nt like to say your being naive but in reality this sort of thing happens a lot . theres a lot of factors come into the equation i m sure funcom diversify its investments but it really depends on how these offset against potential loses on an unsuccesful venture (not saying that aoc will be but it could be) .
like i said in my previous post it will be interesting to see what happens .... personally i think we ll see funcom merge with another company next year . that will speak volumes .
More assumptions?
Just stop already.
These threads just generate nothing more than speculation.I do find it entertaining though that people will post paragraphs on subject matter they really have no clue about.
Nobody but FC knows how AoC is performing.FC employees are the only people who really know how AoC is doing.
Everything else is speculation.
What is your physical limit?
I left WoW to play AoC. Now I play neither (actually, taking a break from MMOs now completely and putting the free time to good use learning Japanese).
I'll give WAR a shot and watch for other dark horse titles with potential, but AoC's failures put the finishing touches on my MMORPG burn out.
In any event, it's completely invalid to assume that most of those who left WoW and haven't returned are actually still playing AoC.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
thats actually a very good point . how much of fucoms future is based on aoc ? its not unheard of for a big coporation to invest heavily in the wrong thing and find themselves in a weakend position so much they are taken over or swallowed up by bigger fish in the pond . i would nt like to say your being naive but in reality this sort of thing happens a lot . theres a lot of factors come into the equation i m sure funcom diversify its investments but it really depends on how these offset against potential loses on an unsuccesful venture (not saying that aoc will be but it could be) .
like i said in my previous post it will be interesting to see what happens .... personally i think we ll see funcom merge with another company next year . that will speak volumes .
More assumptions?
Just stop already.
These threads just generate nothing more than speculation.I do find it entertaining though that people will post paragraphs on subject matter they really have no clue about.
Nobody but FC knows how AoC is performing.FC employees are the only people who really know how AoC is doing.
Everything else is speculation.
What sets the OP apart from other threads is that the speculation is based on hard numbers and Funcom's own financial projections for next quarter.
Extrapolating from Funcom's numbers shows that they indeed are expecting a significant drop off in subscriptions for next quarter. Yes, their own projections could be wrong to the positive or the negative, but it still gives us an idea how things are looking internally.
Also, the last part of the OP does provide us a valid metric to judge subscriptions based on the actual revenue numbers we will see in three months. Funcom may decide not to release subscription figures in the future, but by doing so this quarter they have provided the information necassary to calculate subscriptions based on revenue.
Funcom has painted itself right into a corner.
What pains me the most about this entire fiasco is that we know from last quarter's cash on hand info that they had plenty of cash to continue development, even for another year if necassary. This was not a rush of necessity, it was entirely bad management and faulty decision making.
They had huge potential and threw it away.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Well let me put it like this: I have yet to see an MMO where the subscription numbers did not nosedive after the first initial rush right after release +3 months.
All you can do is to make assumptions or speculations, without any real validity, about future subscription numbers based on the initial wave of new subs against the wave of leaving customers in the first 1-3 months. While there is a rule of thumb that about 30+% of new subscriptions will stay as mid or long-term customers there are no hard facts for that rule. The rate of new subscriptions vs. cancelled subscription after the first 1-3 months is even bigger the more the game gets hyped by the press/company because the expectations of the new players are much higher compared to what the game really can give them.
And the trend for this kind of, eventually, unmet overexpectiations seems to be a new trend for MMOs. Not only AoC had this kind of problem but WAR will most probably go the same route in this regard. Whether this is intended by the developer of said games or if it is something that is more or less forced on them by the fanbase is another, though interesting, story.
I'd put it like that: If AoC can actually keep a more or less steady player base of about 150k-250k subscriptions then they are doing quite well for a new MMO on the market that is currently only present in the US and in Europe. That would put them somewhere between LotRO and EQ2 (based on MMOGCHART.COM). The question is then if this is enough for them or not. But I will be the last one who would want to speculate about something like this. I will leave this to the funny people with the FailCom avatar. They seem to be business analysts by birth and trade
***************************
Remember, remember the 5th of November
***************************
Well let me put it like this: I have yet to see an MMO where the subscription numbers did not nosedive after the first initial rush right after release +3 months.
All you can do is to make assumptions or speculations, without any real validity, about future subscription numbers based on the initial wave of new subs against the wave of leaving customers in the first 1-3 months. While there is a rule of thumb that about 30+% of new subscriptions will stay as mid or long-term customers there are no hard facts for that rule. The rate of new subscriptions vs. cancelled subscription after the first 1-3 months is even bigger the more the game gets hyped by the press/company because the expectations of the new players are much higher compared to what the game really can give them.
And the trend for this kind of, eventually, unmet overexpectiations seems to be a new trend for MMOs. Not only AoC had this kind of problem but WAR will most probably go the same route in this regard. Whether this is intended by the developer of said games or if it is something that is more or less forced on them by the fanbase is another, though interesting, story.
I'd put it like that: If AoC can actually keep a more or less steady player base of about 150k-250k subscriptions then they are doing quite well for a new MMO on the market that is currently only present in the US and in Europe. That would put them somewhere between LotRO and EQ2 (based on MMOGCHART.COM). The question is then if this is enough for them or not. But I will be the last one who would want to speculate about something like this. I will leave this to the funny people with the FailCom avatar. They seem to be business analysts by birth and trade
First off, they didn't report 'subscribers' they reported customers, which is very different. Their 'customers' include people who are in the first 30 days (free), includes people who download the 'free' trial for $1.99 and probably includes a bunch of other people that no other MMORPG includes. Comparing it to LotRO and EQ2 isn't possible, since those two games use the generally accepted 'rule' of only counting people who have actually subscribed to the game. Other companies (including Blizzard) go out of their way to not include anyone except true subscribers. Funcom on the other hand has been as vague and misleading as possible. 415k AoC customers does not equal 415k LotRO subscribers.
As to you second point that Funcom will be 'ok' with 250k customers. If the company lost 8M when they had 415k subscribers and 8M box sales, how are they ever going to be profitable with just 250k customers and almost no box sales (down below #50 on sales charts). The company does not have the cash on hand to support operations for 6 months. The only option they have it to completely gut their development team, which based on the lack of patches for the past month, is probably what they have done. Do you think this broken game can survive without a dev team.. when compared to WOW and Warhammer?
Congrats!,
nice post Lit.
Well, as you stated yourself later on in your answer I did not calculate with 400k+ subscriptions but with 250k. I cannot answer if the 250k will be enough to cover past losses based on the development process and its associated costs but I can see that there are games with much lower subscription numbers that are going fine since years and years. We can go from DDO with an estimated 50k subs up to EQ2 with about 250k subs. If those games would not generate a profit then the powers that be would have pulled the plug long ago. MMOs are there to make a profit for a company. Nothing more and nothing less.
So if you ask me if AoC could survive with 250k subs, if those 250k subs are still there in 6 months time, then my answer would be yes, they probably will still be around.
As a side note: Vanguard is still around despite the fact that alot of people already marked it as dead two years ago. Think about that next time you announce the coming death of an MMO. The number of closed down MMOs up to today can be counted on one hand, compared to the amount of up and running MMOs on the market.
As for your last comment about WoW and Warhammer: I wouldn't put WoW and WAR into the same sentence as you did. The game is not even out yet and no one knows if in the end the hype was much bigger than what the released game will give us. Before AoC was released everyone was hyping about AoC being the best, if not only, alternative to WoW. Now after AoC has been released and WAR coming up on the horizon the same thing starts with WAR.
If I've learned one thing in the last few years as an MMO player then it is that overexpectations and hype for an unreleased game will end in tears and anger for most of the time.
***************************
Remember, remember the 5th of November
***************************
You know what?
I call BS on your whole post op.
Right where you say :Analysis.The 3rd and 4th words after that are "two assumptions".
Your whole post is 1 big assumption.You typed this whole thing like you actually know how FC conducts its business.This is no different than anyone else posting about how FC is going to file bankruptcy any day now.
Do you know how investing works?Do you really think that FC doesnt know how to invest its money?
I dont mean in the game i mean how to make its money grow.Do you believe that big global corporations dont diversify its investments?
You know what? Funcom is a penny stock not a global corporation. It's a fly dropping in terms of size. They developed AoC with borrowed money not out of their own pockets full of smart and global investment strategies. They almost went belly up with AO and barely survived.
Your being naive like everyone else if you think that FC a internationally recognized company doesnt do this and solely relies on its gaming income to show profit.
According to the official Q2 report that is exactly what they are doing. I can not find any revenue from other global strategic investments.
All prognostication is based on assumptions. Science is built on assumptions. Ditto with financial analysis.
And Funcom has made it quite clear how it is doing via it's Q2 results and its revenue guidance for Q3. Quite frankly I find it very bold of them to do so (and in many ways stupid). Because if they miss their revenue targets by 1-2 million dollars it means AoC has hemorrhaged another 50-90% of its customer base.
Lit
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
Lawl. A 40% return rate is very good considering people are leaving for a new game. Many people are tired of WoW, yet 40% come back? Thats great for Blizz.
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
I, and a lot of others, went back to LotRO, after the AoC debacle. Why is it a step backwards to go back to a game you enjoyed? Just because I wanted to try out AoC does not mean that there was, or is, anything wrong with LotRO. Like any other game, some are going to like it, and some aren't. The fact that you referred to a return to LotRO as "such a step backwards" indicates you do not like LotRO. So be it. But, do not assume that because others return to a game YOU do not like means they are stepping backwards. Besides, how do you know they have not "stopped playing [AoC] in anticipation of " Mines of Moria?
Hedonismbot: Your latest performance was as delectable as dipping my bottom over and over into a bath of the silkiest oils and creams.
u might want to take te test again then...prolly a change the age to ur actual age it might work
Not at all. Just because 40% of the playerbase return to WoW doesn't mean the other 60% percent will stay with AoC. Quite of few of them migrated to EQ2, LoTRo, or simply quitting mmo all together.
I seriously doubt that is the case. They might have stopped playing in anticipation of Warhammer, but going back to EQ2 or Lotro, would be such a step backwards that you might as well calculate them totally out of MMO's industry numbers.
I, and a lot of others, went back to LotRO, after the AoC debacle. Why is it a step backwards to go back to a game you enjoyed? Just because I wanted to try out AoC does not mean that there was, or is, anything wrong with LotRO. Like any other game, some are going to like it, and some aren't. The fact that you referred to a return to LotRO as "such a step backwards" indicates you do not like LotRO. So be it. But, do not assume that because others return to a game YOU do not like means they are stepping backwards. Besides, how do you know they have not "stopped playing [AoC] in anticipation of " Mines of Moria?
Lotro is a fine game. But given that you left Lotro to try out Aoc, tells us something, you were tired of Lotro and wanted something new.
Anticipation is what this business is surviving on. Most of the times the anticipiation is not satisfied, just like with AoC. It doesnt mean we all run to the stores and get a copy of "Mines of Moria". IMHO Warhammer will have a good chance of attracting people from the 3 look-alike games (Lotro, Wow and Aoc). But its just an opinion of course, shared by many on these forums, at least until they learn that Warhammer isnt really all that new an exciting, and then they quit that game and start waiting for, who knows. Its simply the way its works.