Thank you for understanding my point. So if Smart did anything wrong in that regard then this week we should hear something being filed. If not then Smart hasn't done anything wrong legally!
Having anything legal happening here does not prove anything as right or wrong, over more speculation. there's a gap between harassing someone online and harassing someone online to a point it opens viability to sue (because as said before the law has not catch-up to the internet on this matter). And even then it depends if one sees as worth it the costs that such would imply, not only on money but also on the media impact and drama it would generate. By all means SG can even resign CIG and then sue... all falls on speculation there. I don't see this as a "black and white" straight situation.
Wrong, if you harass a person with lies then it can be taken to court and a monetary settlement will result. The definition of harassment is very clear and to say people's opinions would be different is complete BS. It is as plain as the hairs on our balls.
If you harass one person with lies then it's specifically defamation. For harassment it doesn't matter if it is truth or lie, it matters what you do with it towards the person that on this case was a public shaming show of SG, that was and still is ongoing.
I'd provide my example, if i grab pictures of you, edit it with an hate message (on this case a truthful one), print them and then go to posting them on walls of public spaces...
...you can betcha your ass you could sue me over harassment. If it was lies you could go extra and add defamation over it. This of course on my country i wouldn't have specifics on how this case would turn out everywhere.
..... and again the selective quote.
For it to be defamation it has to cause you some type of harm. The statement must be published (meaning some third party must have heard it), false, and it must result in harm, usually to the reputation.
Harassment is much more nebulous. I doubt your example actually rises to the level of harassment unless the posters are deliberately placed for you to see them and are reposted if you tear them down on an ongoing basis.
There's probably a reason these things never end and always go in circles.
At least one side is not at all interested in coming to an understanding based on rational and reasonable arguments.
I think both sides have gone over the top in this occasion, with me belonging to one of course.
The problem is that if you go through the posters who claim than no harassment occurred, no harm was done and this is just drama queen behavior from Sandi Gardiner you will see that the majority of them belong to the extremely vocal anti SC squad present on these boards. Some emerged again with different names but their writing is so transparent one can see right through it.
For them this is not about an individual being targeted and his character degraded in a orchestrated manner as all the evidence clearly shows. They do not care. For them this is only about Star Citizen. Everything and anyone tied to the game must be frowned upon and diminished. Even if this means that they must side with degenerates the likes of DS.
I am confident that if in Sandi's place was another person not related to SC they would be sympathetic and this thread would be forgotten. But in this case all they see is Star Citizen and that's all the excuse they need.
There's probably a reason these things never end and always go in circles.
At least one side is not at all interested in coming to an understanding based on rational and reasonable arguments.
I think both sides have gone over the top in this occasion, with me belonging to one of course.
The problem is that if you go through the posters who claim than no harassment occurred, no harm was done and this is just drama queen behavior from Sandi Gardiner you will see that the majority of them belong to the extremely vocal anti SC squad present on these boards. Some emerged again with different names but their writing is so transparent one can see right through it.
For them this is not about an individual being targeted and his character degraded in a orchestrated manner as all the evidence clearly shows. They do not care. For them this is only about Star Citizen. Everything and anyone tied to the game must be frowned upon and diminished. Even if this means that they must side with degenerates the likes of DS.
I am confident that if in Sandi's place was another person not related to SC they would be sympathetic and this thread would be forgotten. But in this case all they see is Star Citizen and that's all the excuse they need.
I think you're right for the most part.
That said, I'm not convinced the people without sympathy for Sandi are particularly prone to sympathy in general.
@vorpal28 covered it nicely for me so thanks for that. Is that sufficient enough for you Erillion?
Still have not seen a link or source for that statement that the movie lost the production company 19 M$ (or 19 million pounds as the poster claimed).
And this calculation was obviously false (30 M$ production cost minus 11.5 M$ box office domestic USA = 19 M$ loss .....is incorrect because he completely ignored that the movie was running in 20+ countries worldwide AND sold DVDs ... and sells them even today 17 years later ... and runs in TV).
I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office. Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to provide a source for his statement. And if his only source was the failed calculation above, then his statement or claim was wrong. That the calculation was false has been shown in this thread and here in this post.
Do I think the movie was bad ? Yes. Do I think the movie was not a money machine? Yes. Do I state things as FACT which are only a personal opinion? No.
@Marelius >>>>Just go on side to international, has nothing listed. So yes it never made it out of USA!>>>> Just because YOU do not find it ..... ;-) .... improve your Google-Foo, Grasshopper. Or just learn to use the scroll up function in this thread, as someone already posted this:
And that list of countries (22) is even incomplete (as I have seen it in Austria, which is not even on the list ... and no, there are no kangaroos in Austria)
Which brings us back to the topic of the post.
Accusing others of "things" with vague innuendo and weak arguments just to paint them in a bad light is IMHO bad form. Referring to the ...if he does that he is capable of anything to further his agenda .... part here (w.r.t. editing).
If these accusations gets so out of hand that a person feels harassed (as in the case of Sandi Gardiner) then a line has been crossed that should not be crossed.
Have fun
PS: And as to why I did not answer some posts within 5 min .... some people DO sleep. And some people do live in other time zones than the USofA ;-)
@vorpal28 covered it nicely for me so thanks for that. Is that sufficient enough for you Erillion?
Still have not seen a link or source for that statement that the movie lost the production company 19 M$ (or 19 million pounds as the poster claimed).
And this calculation was obviously false (30 M$ production cost minus 11.5 M$ box office domestic USA = 19 M$ loss .....is incorrect because he completely ignored that the movie was running in 20+ countries worldwide AND sold DVDs ... and sells them even today 17 years later ... and runs in TV).
I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office. Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to provide a source for his statement. And if his only source was the failed calculation above, then his statement or claim was wrong. That the calculation was false has been shown in this thread and here in this post.
Do I think the movie was bad ? Yes. Do I think the movie was not a money machine? Yes. Do I state things as FACT which are only a personal opinion? No.
@Marelius >>>>Just go on side to international, has nothing listed. So yes it never made it out of USA!>>>> Just because YOU do not find it ..... ;-) .... improve your Google-Foo, Grasshopper. Or just learn to use the scroll up function in this thread, as someone already posted this:
And that list of countries (22) is even incomplete (as I have seen it in Austria, which is not even on the list ... and no, there are no kangaroos in Austria)
Which brings us back to the topic of the post.
Accusing others of "things" with vague innuendo and weak arguments just to paint them in a bad light is IMHO bad form. Referring to the ...if he does that he is capable of anything to further his agenda .... part here (w.r.t. editing).
If these accusations gets so out of hand that a person feels harassed (as in the case of Sandi Gardiner) then a line has been crossed that should not be crossed.
Have fun
PS: And as to why I did not answer some posts within 5 min .... some people DO sleep. And some people do live in other time zones than the USofA ;-)
Still haven't seen your figure for the earnings of "Wing Commander" though. Just continuing posts that everyone is wrong.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
There's probably a reason these things never end and always go in circles.
At least one side is not at all interested in coming to an understanding based on rational and reasonable arguments.
I think both sides have gone over the top in this occasion, with me belonging to one of course.
The problem is that if you go through the posters who claim than no harassment occurred, no harm was done and this is just drama queen behavior from Sandi Gardiner you will see that the majority of them belong to the extremely vocal anti SC squad present on these boards. Some emerged again with different names but their writing is so transparent one can see right through it.
For them this is not about an individual being targeted and his character degraded in a orchestrated manner as all the evidence clearly shows. They do not care. For them this is only about Star Citizen. Everything and anyone tied to the game must be frowned upon and diminished. Even if this means that they must side with degenerates the likes of DS.
I am confident that if in Sandi's place was another person not related to SC they would be sympathetic and this thread would be forgotten. But in this case all they see is Star Citizen and that's all the excuse they need.
Sad, you were doing so well, right up to the point when you made your freudian slip "an individual being targeted and HIS character being degraded in an orchestrated manner"(emphasis mine) and then you go on "degenerates the likes of DS".
Sandi Gardiner closed her social media for the stated reason of ongoing harassment. But DS was blocked from those pages for sometime prior to this. Linking him to the odious harassment of SG is therefore a smear unles you have actual evidence of recent attacks by him on HER social media pages.
Still haven't seen your figure for the earnings of "Wing Commander" though. Just continuing posts that everyone is wrong.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
You might want to read this again:
>>>>I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office.
Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to
provide a source for his statement.>>>>
Still haven't seen your figure for the earnings of "Wing Commander" though. Just continuing posts that everyone is wrong.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
You might want to read this again:
>>>>I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office.
Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to
provide a source for his statement.>>>>
Have fun
Read it once, read it twice, read it three times and it's still not true. He provided a source, you disputed it. Now if you want anyone to believe there is a significant difference between his reliable source and your, 'it must be higher because' including your estimate of 200 people at one session in Austria you should provide your own source.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
Still haven't seen your figure for the earnings of "Wing Commander" though. Just continuing posts that everyone is wrong.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
You might want to read this again:
>>>>I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office.
Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to
provide a source for his statement.>>>>
Its on the right hand side and listed as Budget and Box office; Budget for the film is listed as being $30 million, with the Box office figure listed as being just under $11.6 million. It also had a rotten tomatoes score of 10% certified rotten, but i am not sure whether the rotten tomatoes score should be taken seriously in light of various movies recently 'scored' by them, a prime example being the recent Ghostbusters 2016, which actually had a fairly high scoring on Rotten Tomatoes, and yet has managed to cost Sony over $70 million in losses, as the Film massively underperformed. The question about the Wing Commander film though is interesting, in that while it implies that the film made a loss of nearly $20 million, if the Budget for the film was indeed $30 million, as seems likely, that does not also include advertising/marketing costs, would could easily have doubled that figure at least (in the case of Ghostbusters 2016, the budget of around $150 million was only part of it as advertising etc. added several $100's millions to the overall costs of the film, so much so that to break even, the film needed to generate over $400 million) and even the $11.6 million it took in the Box Office, does that take into account also the amount that the Cinema chains etc would have charged to show the film? If anything the figures shown are a bit light on details as the actual losses the film incurred would have been far far higher than the ones listed if the film did indeed only cost $30 million to make, and yet only took in $11.6 million in the box office, actual losses would exceed, in all probability, $50+ million. O.o
Why are we talking about the success of such a terrible film as if it was relevant?
Also, box office isn't the same as combined profit.
No, it isn't the same, it just represents most of it. Pretty sure we didn't all buy Wing Commander T-Shirts so i am guessing their merchandising didn't generate much either.
Why are we talking about the success of such a terrible film as if it was relevant?
Also, box office isn't the same as combined profit.
No, it isn't the same, it just represents most of it. Pretty sure we didn't all buy Wing Commander T-Shirts so i am guessing their merchandising didn't generate much either.
Aren't you forgetting the home/DVD market? Some movies actually manage to turn a terrible box office performance into overall profit through sales on that market.
Also, I don't know if it's confirmed that "Box Office" means Worldwide Box Office.
Beyond that, I'm still confused why we're even talking about this. Wing Commander is a terrible movie, so why would it make a lot of money? I mean, lots of terrible movies do - but that doesn't make them great.
Obviously, it's subjective - but I think we can all agree that it's not exactly a masterpiece
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
a) Claims based on lack of credible sources are opinions, not facts (which is at the core of the accusations against Sandi Gardiner too). Incorrect claims form the foundation of the harrassment campaign against her. As an example to such false claims the Wing Commander movie net loss is being discussed.
b) some posters here claim that ... if someone is doing THAT, he is capable of doing ANYTHING .... which is plain stupid. Especially when "THAT" did not happen in the first place ... they just incorrectly claim it happened. You will also find numerous such examples in the harrassment campaign against Sandi Gardiner.
Have fun
PS:
And yes, i guess most of us agree the movie was not a masterpiece and it was not a money printing machine. I still snicker at them having used chopped down "Lightnings" as space fighters. But the quality of the movies is not the point here. The point is that claims without evidence are opinions, not facts.
a) Claims based on lack of credible sources are opinions, not facts (which is at the core of the accusations against Sandi Gardiner too). Incorrect claims form the foundation of the harrassment campaign against her. As an example to such false claims the Wing Commander movie net loss is being discussed.
b) some posters here claim that ... if someone is doing THAT, he is capable of doing ANYTHING .... which is plain stupid. Especially when "THAT" did not happen in the first place ... they just incorrectly claim it happened. You will also find numerous such examples in the harrassment campaign against Sandi Gardiner.
Have fun
Anything IS possible, regardless.
But we're talking about a movie, not a game. Also, I know of an endless amount of FANTASTIC directors who made crap movies, including masters like Coppola, Cameron and Scott.
So, I just wanted to point out that whether the movie was a success or not - it means absolutely nothing in terms of the potential of Chris Roberts.
If you look at the video games he's been involved with, he's one of THE most successful developers of all time - and his games have received timeless praise from critics and users alike, AND the vast majority of them have turned quite a profit.
Now, the obvious route to make that into nothing is to pretend Chris Roberts had little or nothing to do with those games, which I find particularly laughable and hypocritical - but what can you do when you're dealing with irrational and unreasonable people?
Even if that was true, there's one thing I know for certain - and that's that Chris has a fantastic concept on his hands. I've been playing games for some 30+ years - and I've always had a very profound interest in design and the game development process. That means I know a quality design when I hear about it.
The vision of Star Citizen has been 100% consistent from day one - and even if the scope has been vastly expanded - and he's aiming for something that's almost impossible to achieve - it's not the goal I'm so excited by. It's whatever they can come up with that's as close to that goal as is possible, given the team, vision and budget.
Since I've followed development very closely, I have a very strong confidence in this team - and many of them have been a part of great games in the past.
I mean, you have people like Roberts, his brother and Zurovec on this team. You don't have to hear Zurovec speak for more than 10 minutes to understand that he's absolutely brilliant as a game designer - and MUCH more down to earth than Roberts. He's the one making the dream tangible.
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
Have fun
I accept all of your sources of additional revenue, but all of them come with additional costs. But without any quantification of those additional revenues and additional costs we are left with the U.S. box office and estimated production budget. The difference between these being a $18,400,000 loss. So until someone provides a more complete picture that's the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
PS this sub-topic goes back to a point half way through the thread.
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
Have fun
I accept all of your sources of additional revenue, but all of them come with additional costs. But without any quantification of those additional revenues and additional costs we are left with the U.S. box office and estimated production budget. The difference between these being a $18,400,000 loss. So until someone provides a more complete picture that's the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
PS this sub-topic goes back to a point half way through the thread.
That makes no sense at all.
You know for a fact that you don't have all the relevant numbers, but you choose to call this logically incomplete and false number "the standard" - because you don't have access to more information?
That's like calling someone a murderer because someone was shot - and the person in question happens to have a gun in his hands.
That's "the standard of justice" according to you.
Do you know what an unimpressive standard looks like?
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
Have fun
I accept all of your sources of additional revenue, but all of them come with additional costs. But without any quantification of those additional revenues and additional costs we are left with the U.S. box office and estimated production budget. The difference between these being a $18,400,000 loss. So until someone provides a more complete picture that's the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
PS this sub-topic goes back to a point half way through the thread.
That makes no sense at all.
You know for a fact that you don't have all the relevant numbers, but you choose to call this logically incomplete and false number "the standard" - because you don't have access to more information?
That's like calling someone a murderer because someone was shot - and the person in question happens to have a gun in his hands.
That's "the standard of justice" according to you.
Do you know what an unimpressive standard looks like?
LOL well I could have gone the whole hog and talked about the costs.
Production budget $30,000,000 Advertising and distribution generally regarded as twice the production budget $60,000,000 Overseas distribution and advertising costs for at least 24 countries. Including dubbing/sub-titles in at least ten markets. No idea of cost. DVD production, distribution and advertising. Again no idea.
Then there are the revenues. U.S. box office. $11,600,000 Overseas box office ???? DVD sales. ????? TV licensing ????
The $18,400,000 may be an unimpressive standard, but it is the one we have got, and I am guessing it is way too low. Feel free to fill in the blanks and refine the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
Have fun
I accept all of your sources of additional revenue, but all of them come with additional costs. But without any quantification of those additional revenues and additional costs we are left with the U.S. box office and estimated production budget. The difference between these being a $18,400,000 loss. So until someone provides a more complete picture that's the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
PS this sub-topic goes back to a point half way through the thread.
That makes no sense at all.
You know for a fact that you don't have all the relevant numbers, but you choose to call this logically incomplete and false number "the standard" - because you don't have access to more information?
That's like calling someone a murderer because someone was shot - and the person in question happens to have a gun in his hands.
That's "the standard of justice" according to you.
Do you know what an unimpressive standard looks like?
LOL well I could have gone the whole hog and talked about the costs.
Production budget $30,000,000 Advertising and distribution generally regarded as twice the production budget $60,000,000 Overseas distribution and advertising costs for at least 24 countries. Including dubbing/sub-titles in at least ten markets. No idea of cost. DVD production, distribution and advertising. Again no idea.
Then there are the revenues. U.S. box office. $11,600,000 Overseas box office ???? DVD sales. ????? TV licensing ????
The $18,400,000 may be an unimpressive standard, but it is the one we have got, and I am guessing it is way too low. Feel free to fill in the blanks and refine the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
I'd rather do the logical and reasonable thing, which is to acknowledge that I can't know what I can't know.
Making claims about final profit based on highly incomplete information is for people who don't care about being rational or reasonable.
I just thought I'd point out how weak and useless your case is.
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
Have fun
I accept all of your sources of additional revenue, but all of them come with additional costs. But without any quantification of those additional revenues and additional costs we are left with the U.S. box office and estimated production budget. The difference between these being a $18,400,000 loss. So until someone provides a more complete picture that's the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
PS this sub-topic goes back to a point half way through the thread.
That makes no sense at all.
You know for a fact that you don't have all the relevant numbers, but you choose to call this logically incomplete and false number "the standard" - because you don't have access to more information?
That's like calling someone a murderer because someone was shot - and the person in question happens to have a gun in his hands.
That's "the standard of justice" according to you.
Do you know what an unimpressive standard looks like?
LOL well I could have gone the whole hog and talked about the costs.
Production budget $30,000,000 Advertising and distribution generally regarded as twice the production budget $60,000,000 Overseas distribution and advertising costs for at least 24 countries. Including dubbing/sub-titles in at least ten markets. No idea of cost. DVD production, distribution and advertising. Again no idea.
Then there are the revenues. U.S. box office. $11,600,000 Overseas box office ???? DVD sales. ????? TV licensing ????
The $18,400,000 may be an unimpressive standard, but it is the one we have got, and I am guessing it is way too low. Feel free to fill in the blanks and refine the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
I'd rather do the logical and reasonable thing, which is to acknowledge that I can't know what I can't know.
Making claims about final profit based on highly incomplete information is for people who don't care about being rational or reasonable.
I just thought I'd point out how weak and useless your case is.
Says the man who calls a profit and loss estimate as something akin to a murder.
For me it's more like an amateur hop,skip and jump competition. A couple of people give it a try and someone points to the longest mark and says well that's the standard and one person says 'anyone can do better than that, try again' and another says 'not much of a standard'. But neither attempts to beat the mark.
So how about it? Take a run and show us the goods.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
"Sandi Gardiner Stops Social Media Over Targeted Harassment" now presents to you.... "Wing Commander the movie"
Enjoy now, the ultimate experience of internet flame wars over irrelevant and non-related things to one's topic... Brought to you by the same people all over again.
If this thread has gone as past its point as it is now, then it should be closed down...
Comments
For it to be defamation it has to cause you some type of harm. The statement must be published (meaning some third party must have heard it), false, and it must result in harm, usually to the reputation.
Harassment is much more nebulous. I doubt your example actually rises to the level of harassment unless the posters are deliberately placed for you to see them and are reposted if you tear them down on an ongoing basis.
At least one side is not at all interested in coming to an understanding based on rational and reasonable arguments.
The problem is that if you go through the posters who claim than no harassment occurred, no harm was done and this is just drama queen behavior from Sandi Gardiner you will see that the majority of them belong to the extremely vocal anti SC squad present on these boards. Some emerged again with different names but their writing is so transparent one can see right through it.
For them this is not about an individual being targeted and his character degraded in a orchestrated manner as all the evidence clearly shows. They do not care. For them this is only about Star Citizen. Everything and anyone tied to the game must be frowned upon and diminished. Even if this means that they must side with degenerates the likes of DS.
I am confident that if in Sandi's place was another person not related to SC they would be sympathetic and this thread would be forgotten. But in this case all they see is Star Citizen and that's all the excuse they need.
That said, I'm not convinced the people without sympathy for Sandi are particularly prone to sympathy in general.
And this calculation was obviously false (30 M$ production cost minus 11.5 M$ box office domestic USA = 19 M$ loss .....is incorrect because he completely ignored that the movie was running in 20+ countries worldwide AND sold DVDs ... and sells them even today 17 years later ... and runs in TV).
I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office. Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to provide a source for his statement. And if his only source was the failed calculation above, then his statement or claim was wrong. That the calculation was false has been shown in this thread and here in this post.
Do I think the movie was bad ? Yes. Do I think the movie was not a money machine? Yes.
Do I state things as FACT which are only a personal opinion? No.
@Marelius
>>>>Just go on side to international, has nothing listed. So yes it never made it out of USA!>>>>
Just because YOU do not find it ..... ;-) .... improve your Google-Foo, Grasshopper. Or just learn to use the scroll up function in this thread, as someone already posted this:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0131646/releaseinfo
And that list of countries (22) is even incomplete (as I have seen it in Austria, which is not even on the list ... and no, there are no kangaroos in Austria)
Which brings us back to the topic of the post.
Accusing others of "things" with vague innuendo and weak arguments just to paint them in a bad light is IMHO bad form. Referring to the ...if he does that he is capable of anything to further his agenda .... part here (w.r.t. editing).
If these accusations gets so out of hand that a person feels harassed (as in the case of Sandi Gardiner) then a line has been crossed that should not be crossed.
Have fun
PS:
And as to why I did not answer some posts within 5 min .... some people DO sleep.
And some people do live in other time zones than the USofA ;-)
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
Sandi Gardiner closed her social media for the stated reason of ongoing harassment. But DS was blocked from those pages for sometime prior to this. Linking him to the odious harassment of SG is therefore a smear unles you have actual evidence of recent attacks by him on HER social media pages.
>>>>I do not have to search for a number for worldwide gross box office. Thats not the point. The one who makes a claim (19 M$ loss) has to provide a source for his statement.>>>>
Have fun
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Commander_(film)
Its on the right hand side and listed as Budget and Box office;
Budget for the film is listed as being $30 million, with the Box office figure listed as being just under $11.6 million.
It also had a rotten tomatoes score of 10% certified rotten, but i am not sure whether the rotten tomatoes score should be taken seriously in light of various movies recently 'scored' by them, a prime example being the recent Ghostbusters 2016, which actually had a fairly high scoring on Rotten Tomatoes, and yet has managed to cost Sony over $70 million in losses, as the Film massively underperformed.
The question about the Wing Commander film though is interesting, in that while it implies that the film made a loss of nearly $20 million, if the Budget for the film was indeed $30 million, as seems likely, that does not also include advertising/marketing costs, would could easily have doubled that figure at least (in the case of Ghostbusters 2016, the budget of around $150 million was only part of it as advertising etc. added several $100's millions to the overall costs of the film, so much so that to break even, the film needed to generate over $400 million) and even the $11.6 million it took in the Box Office, does that take into account also the amount that the Cinema chains etc would have charged to show the film? If anything the figures shown are a bit light on details as the actual losses the film incurred would have been far far higher than the ones listed if the film did indeed only cost $30 million to make, and yet only took in $11.6 million in the box office, actual losses would exceed, in all probability, $50+ million. O.o
Also, box office isn't the same as combined profit.
Pretty sure we didn't all buy Wing Commander T-Shirts so i am guessing their merchandising didn't generate much either.
Also, I don't know if it's confirmed that "Box Office" means Worldwide Box Office.
Beyond that, I'm still confused why we're even talking about this. Wing Commander is a terrible movie, so why would it make a lot of money? I mean, lots of terrible movies do - but that doesn't make them great.
Obviously, it's subjective - but I think we can all agree that it's not exactly a masterpiece
If you scroll up in this thread you will see that the number you just quoted above is EXACTLY the gross US domestic box office number (as has been shown in other links in this thread).
It completely ignores income from worldwide box office income (from 22+ countries). Other movies based on computer games (i gave an example in this thread) made a significant amount of money outside of the USA (sometimes significantly more than in the USA itself ... see example WoW movie).
It also completely ignores all sales from DVD (its still being sold today, after 17 years).
It also completely ignores all royalty from TV showings (TV in Sweden is listed. It was also shown in Austrian TV several times in the last 17 years).
The advertising for this movie has a name: the Wing Commander series of computer games.
@craftseeker
>>>> He provided a source, you disputed it. >>>
And my dispute is based on showing that he did a faulty calculation. Scroll up for the sources where it is established that the calculation is faulty. Because he only consider US gross box office and completely ignores other sources of income (see above). That some websites list the "worldwide box office" with the exact number that is the "US domestic box office" just means that those websites list the wrong number - making the same mistake as he did.
Have fun
we are talking about this because
a) Claims based on lack of credible sources are opinions, not facts (which is at the core of the accusations against Sandi Gardiner too). Incorrect claims form the foundation of the harrassment campaign against her. As an example to such false claims the Wing Commander movie net loss is being discussed.
b) some posters here claim that ... if someone is doing THAT, he is capable of doing ANYTHING .... which is plain stupid. Especially when "THAT" did not happen in the first place ... they just incorrectly claim it happened. You will also find numerous such examples in the harrassment campaign against Sandi Gardiner.
Have fun
PS:
And yes, i guess most of us agree the movie was not a masterpiece and it was not a money printing machine. I still snicker at them having used chopped down "Lightnings" as space fighters. But the quality of the movies is not the point here. The point is that claims without evidence are opinions, not facts.
But we're talking about a movie, not a game. Also, I know of an endless amount of FANTASTIC directors who made crap movies, including masters like Coppola, Cameron and Scott.
So, I just wanted to point out that whether the movie was a success or not - it means absolutely nothing in terms of the potential of Chris Roberts.
If you look at the video games he's been involved with, he's one of THE most successful developers of all time - and his games have received timeless praise from critics and users alike, AND the vast majority of them have turned quite a profit.
Now, the obvious route to make that into nothing is to pretend Chris Roberts had little or nothing to do with those games, which I find particularly laughable and hypocritical - but what can you do when you're dealing with irrational and unreasonable people?
Even if that was true, there's one thing I know for certain - and that's that Chris has a fantastic concept on his hands. I've been playing games for some 30+ years - and I've always had a very profound interest in design and the game development process. That means I know a quality design when I hear about it.
The vision of Star Citizen has been 100% consistent from day one - and even if the scope has been vastly expanded - and he's aiming for something that's almost impossible to achieve - it's not the goal I'm so excited by. It's whatever they can come up with that's as close to that goal as is possible, given the team, vision and budget.
Since I've followed development very closely, I have a very strong confidence in this team - and many of them have been a part of great games in the past.
I mean, you have people like Roberts, his brother and Zurovec on this team. You don't have to hear Zurovec speak for more than 10 minutes to understand that he's absolutely brilliant as a game designer - and MUCH more down to earth than Roberts. He's the one making the dream tangible.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
PS this sub-topic goes back to a point half way through the thread.
You know for a fact that you don't have all the relevant numbers, but you choose to call this logically incomplete and false number "the standard" - because you don't have access to more information?
That's like calling someone a murderer because someone was shot - and the person in question happens to have a gun in his hands.
That's "the standard of justice" according to you.
Do you know what an unimpressive standard looks like?
Production budget $30,000,000
Advertising and distribution generally regarded as twice the production budget $60,000,000
Overseas distribution and advertising costs for at least 24 countries. Including dubbing/sub-titles in at least ten markets. No idea of cost.
DVD production, distribution and advertising. Again no idea.
Then there are the revenues.
U.S. box office. $11,600,000
Overseas box office ????
DVD sales. ?????
TV licensing ????
The $18,400,000 may be an unimpressive standard, but it is the one we have got, and I am guessing it is way too low. Feel free to fill in the blanks and refine the standard.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
Making claims about final profit based on highly incomplete information is for people who don't care about being rational or reasonable.
I just thought I'd point out how weak and useless your case is.
For me it's more like an amateur hop,skip and jump competition. A couple of people give it a try and someone points to the longest mark and says well that's the standard and one person says 'anyone can do better than that, try again' and another says 'not much of a standard'. But neither attempts to beat the mark.
So how about it? Take a run and show us the goods.
Have fun doing the research, take as long as you like.
"Wing Commander the movie"
Enjoy now, the ultimate experience of internet flame wars over irrelevant and non-related things to one's topic... Brought to you by the same people all over again.
If this thread has gone as past its point as it is now, then it should be closed down...