Arguing with someone with sunk cost fallacy is like arguing with a wall. There's no point in having a debate with these people since they won't listen to reason. You're better off ignoring them.
Apparently some of them are not attending the meetings over at Erillions house. I dont think they heard about how awesome his cookies are. If he would just start serving donuts I would trade sides in a heartbeat. He might be a pain but I hear Erillion is one heck of a baker and could give Buddy Valastro a run for his money!
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I just want to say that owning a 20 million dollar building/office doesn't mean you sat down and wrote out a 20 million dollar check. In all likelihood, the relative outlay of liquid capital for a building like that is minimal. This is pretty standard.
Sorry Mate, your leader Erillion already said they do not own the building and only rent it. Plus there is this line in from the story:
"Cloud Imperium has invested around £15 million in its UK business so far. "
That doesnt say they paid some now and owe more later. It says they have spent 20 million dollars so far.
Great but that's the total amount they've put into the project to the date of the article or whenever whoever got whatever financial information. That includes initial purchase and build out (the larger costs), labor, work completed, etc etc.
After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially. As their rating improves, they could also see some debt restructuring by way of refinancing and maybe that's what the restructuring was when Derek Smart thought he had something.
When you start a business, you're biggest outlay of cash is usually site purchase, build out, and inventory. All of that is typically front loaded.
I'm not going to try to tell anyone they are wrong about CIG having financial issues, only that there is nothing available to the public that we can use as proof to justify the assertions.
I'm so confused... First you post that they did not necessarily drop 20 million when you said:
"owning a 20 million dollar building/office doesn't mean you sat down and wrote out a 20 million dollar check."
Then when corrected, you come back with:
"After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially."
Your first point is they did not spend 20 million but then your second point is that future costs will be less? For a regular company that would be true but not CIG. The article reads:
"Having started out with one floor of an office building, in 2015 the
company took on a second floor and is already planning to expand to a
third"
So they are already planning on spending more to take over a third floor which in your own words costs more. Did you even read the article or are you just jumping in for the LOL's?
No, my point is that they didn't just go out and drop 20 million on a 20 million dollar building/office. It was the first line in the post you quoted, "owning a 20 million dollar building/office doesn't mean you sat down and wrote out a 20 million dollar check". Then I expanded and said that the $15 million number you brought up is more than just the office expenditures, which include, "initial purchase and build out (the larger costs), labor, work completed".
The part about, "After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially", which is still true as your major, up front expenditures will likely be getting the location and building it out. Depending upon the building status when it was purchased/leased, the build out costs can go up or down as structural changes will raise the cost quite a bit. That would be planning, build out of the various offices/divisions, etc etc. Adding building out a third floor of a building won't cost anywhere near what they paid to get the thing open in the first place.
I find it humourous that you would bring up me posting for the LOLs when you're it seems like you're intentionally being daft. Agreeing with goobsnews won't win you any favors as he's essentially proven himself to be just a troll.
I would have put it all up on Google drive and had everyone work on the same code, LOL.
They are using Shotgun.
Yeah, the people who can't shut up about being so open with development are using a tool that hides development. Also what is pretty ominous is the fact that it's main use is for movies.
It's because Chris want's to be a big Movie Producer since he was a kid. It's his childhood dream.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
I would have put it all up on Google drive and had everyone work on the same code, LOL.
They are using Shotgun.
Yeah, the people who can't shut up about being so open with development are using a tool that hides development. Also what is pretty ominous is the fact that it's main use is for movies.
It's because Chris want's to be a big Movie Producer since he was a kid. It's his childhood dream.
Oh man, in that case, every single youtuber is an actor + director, amazing. So much excellent talent in the world. I loved the episode CR did where he couldn't play his own game, that one was my fave.
I would have put it all up on Google drive and had everyone work on the same code, LOL.
They are using Shotgun.
Yeah, the people who can't shut up about being so open with development are using a tool that hides development. Also what is pretty ominous is the fact that it's main use is for movies.
It's because Chris want's to be a big Movie Producer since he was a kid. It's his childhood dream. Have you had a look at Chris Robert's and Sandi's IMDB Page. It's hilarious! They list their Crowd funding streams as TV shows! Not kidding here. This guy is clearly delusional.
[snip]
Oh man, in that case, every single youtuber is an actor + director, amazing. So much excellent talent in the world. I loved the episode CR did where he couldn't play his own game, that one was my fave.
Nooooo! Actor, Director and Executive Producer.
That was the best Episode, great directing and acting, or was it?
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
Boy that listing sure seems to have stalled the conversation. Nicely done.
Every time i post links to proof facts it get's really quite, sometimes they try to quote one sentence and take a jab or change the subject. Usually they run away though.
I really don't understand the Star Citizens. I do like some games and i will defend them but i will also acknowledge their downsides and bugs. I guess some people just can't take a step back and see the bigger picture.
I actually wonder if it is even allowed to post drivel like "10 for the Chairman" as a TV series when in fact it is nothing else but a support video for a private website.
I am going to write IMDB and ask. Would be funny if it got taken down.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
Boy that listing sure seems to have stalled the conversation. Nicely done.
Every time i post links to proof facts it get's really quite, sometimes they try to quote one sentence and take a jab or change the subject. Usually they run away though.
I really don't understand the Star Citizens. I do like some games and i will defend them but i will also acknowledge their downsides and bugs. I guess some people just can't take a step back and see the bigger picture.
I actually wonder if it is even allowed to post drivel like "10 for the Chairman" as a TV series when in fact it is nothing else but a support video for a private website.
I am going to write IMDB and ask. Would be funny if it got taken down.
I really don't understand the Star Citizens. I do like some games and i will defend them but i will also acknowledge their downsides and bugs. I guess some people just can't take a step back and see the bigger picture.
Seems like people are waking up. Be interesting to see how many ban's come down the pipe.
The hostility in that thread is awesome. One backer wants to walk away from the project and is trying to get CIG to refund their pledge via support and is getting attacked for it lol. I really enjoyed the comment from a backer telling the person wanting a refund who is currently living in South Korea to move to North Korea because they hear they deal with complainers well.
Seems like people are waking up. Be interesting to see how many ban's come down the pipe.
I think it is weird how even students are spending big bucks on ships for a game that is still possibly a couple of years off. I find it difficult to convince myself to even spend $60 on a game that has been released let alone something still in the works.
How is it that kids get themselves into a position where they have spent $600 on something they can't even use for several years and for which there is no guarantee that they will actually be able to use?
If my son used the money I give him to pay fees and such in the university , I'll smack him for sure. What rubbish spending my husband's and my hard earned money on nonsense.
Do you honestly believe that to make the game you need four offices around the world some of which cost $20 million and 15 companies; Is that really necessary to make a game?
Of course not. You can build them from your own garage, from your own spare time fully self funded.
If you are talking about SC specifically, the answer inevitably would be YES. Why, because they can. They don't need any justification on how to spend the fund, as long as it is used towards making a game.
If you have concerns on how CR is spending the funds, your concern is understandable.
If you are asking whether SC could be make by having 1 team in a building, probably enslaved there for eternity, then only God will have the answer for that. Probably. May be not. No body knows for sure. Lots of opinions.
Some are comparing, creating SC is like going to Mars, which is realy not comparable. Going to Mars requires R&D because we currently does not have the technology for it. At least we are not efficient at it. It could take years, decades, nobody can know for sure, only speculate and hopes. That is why it falls under R&D, the investment is not guaranteed.
Building a business, a game, is not a long term investment. Any business requires RoI that is economically justifiable. Eg. There is little point investing in a product where it would take 10 years to developed and another 10 to get your capital back and another 10 years to make a profit. You have more chance of seeing a profit by putting your money in a bonds (at least you would not die of old age before having the chance of enjoying the profit).
I just want to say that owning a 20 million dollar building/office doesn't mean you sat down and wrote out a 20 million dollar check. In all likelihood, the relative outlay of liquid capital for a building like that is minimal. This is pretty standard.
Sorry Mate, your leader Erillion already said they do not own the building and only rent it. Plus there is this line in from the story:
"Cloud Imperium has invested around £15 million in its UK business so far. "
That doesnt say they paid some now and owe more later. It says they have spent 20 million dollars so far.
Great but that's the total amount they've put into the project to the date of the article or whenever whoever got whatever financial information. That includes initial purchase and build out (the larger costs), labor, work completed, etc etc.
After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially. As their rating improves, they could also see some debt restructuring by way of refinancing and maybe that's what the restructuring was when Derek Smart thought he had something.
When you start a business, you're biggest outlay of cash is usually site purchase, build out, and inventory. All of that is typically front loaded.
I'm not going to try to tell anyone they are wrong about CIG having financial issues, only that there is nothing available to the public that we can use as proof to justify the assertions.
I'm so confused... First you post that they did not necessarily drop 20 million when you said:
"owning a 20 million dollar building/office doesn't mean you sat down and wrote out a 20 million dollar check."
Then when corrected, you come back with:
"After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially."
Your first point is they did not spend 20 million but then your second point is that future costs will be less? For a regular company that would be true but not CIG. The article reads:
"Having started out with one floor of an office building, in 2015 the
company took on a second floor and is already planning to expand to a
third"
So they are already planning on spending more to take over a third floor which in your own words costs more. Did you even read the article or are you just jumping in for the LOL's?
No, my point is that they didn't just go out and drop 20 million on a 20 million dollar building/office. It was the first line in the post you quoted, "owning a 20 million dollar building/office doesn't mean you sat down and wrote out a 20 million dollar check". Then I expanded and said that the $15 million number you brought up is more than just the office expenditures, which include, "initial purchase and build out (the larger costs), labor, work completed".
The part about, "After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially", which is still true as your major, up front expenditures will likely be getting the location and building it out. Depending upon the building status when it was purchased/leased, the build out costs can go up or down as structural changes will raise the cost quite a bit. That would be planning, build out of the various offices/divisions, etc etc. Adding building out a third floor of a building won't cost anywhere near what they paid to get the thing open in the first place.
I find it humourous that you would bring up me posting for the LOLs when you're it seems like you're intentionally being daft. Agreeing with goobsnews won't win you any favors as he's essentially proven himself to be just a troll.
First off, I apologize for re-quoting all of this but its needed for reference.
Lets start off with this: "No, my point is that they didn't just go out and drop 20 million on a 20 million dollar building/office" They did go out and over the course of 2 years drop 20 million on this company. No one is saying they dropped 20 million in a day, you are the one being daft here.
Then you imply that I am misrepresenting the facts when I quote this "Cloud Imperium has invested around £15 million in its UK business so far. " and you make it seem like I said 15 MILLION when I quoted a UK press release that showed the amount CIG spent in EUROS. Again, I am not daft because I can read and pay attention. Maybe you should try it.
I find it humerus that anyone who believes himself intelligent would make so many mistakes in his post. You obviously did not read the article being referenced and you totally missed the currency and highlighted it as an issue when really the issue is with you and your comprehension skills.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
Seems like people are waking up. Be interesting to see how many ban's come down the pipe.
I think it is weird how even students are spending big bucks on ships for a game that is still possibly a couple of years off. I find it difficult to convince myself to even spend $60 on a game that has been released let alone something still in the works.
How is it that kids get themselves into a position where they have spent $600 on something they can't even use for several years and for which there is no guarantee that they will actually be able to use?
Banks love to give young adults credit cards. They already have student loans. Let's make them overspend on credit cards to make sure we have a nice system of enslavement through credit. They will be obedient and hard working citizens for their whole life trying to pay off their debt.
I have not bought a game for full price in years. Why? I have a huge backlog and i can wait until they are 50% or more off. I am in no rush.
Do you honestly believe that to make the game you need four offices around the world some of which cost $20 million and 15 companies; Is that really necessary to make a game?
Of course not. You can build them from your own garage, from your own spare time fully self funded.
If you are talking about SC specifically, the answer inevitably would be YES. Why, because they can. They don't need any justification on how to spend the fund, as long as it is used towards making a game.
If you have concerns on how CR is spending the funds, your concern is understandable.
If you are asking whether SC could be make by having 1 team in a building, probably enslaved there for eternity, then only God will have the answer for that. Probably. May be not. No body knows for sure. Lots of opinions.
Some are comparing, creating SC is like going to Mars, which is realy not comparable. Going to Mars requires R&D because we currently does not have the technology for it. At least we are not efficient at it. It could take years, decades, nobody can know for sure, only speculate and hopes. That is why it falls under R&D, the investment is not guaranteed.
Building a business, a game, is not a long term investment. Any business requires RoI that is economically justifiable. Eg. There is little point investing in a product where it would take 10 years to developed and another 10 to get your capital back and another 10 years to make a profit. You have more chance of seeing a profit by putting your money in a bonds (at least you would not die of old age before having the chance of enjoying the profit).
Almost one quarter of the total funds and that is just ONE of 4 Location.
You could pay 170 developers to work on the project for a full year, or 85 for 2 years, or even 43 for 4 years?
I think it is misappropriation of funds, but sadly there is nothing you or me can do about it.
Those 20 million are not for the game, they are an investment in real estate that will still be there as a safety cushion for those in charge if this whole thing turns sideways.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
Those 20 million are not for the game, they are an investment in real estate
Interesting ... nowhere in the article it mentions anything about buying real estate. To the contrary ... they are specifically talking about a "multi-million pound performance capture shoot that would qualify for UK video games tax relief"
Furthermore, the office building is not owned by CIG. Never was. They rent the offices. The information about ownership can all be found in the internet (i posted the links previously). Currently available "Freedom House .... 2nd foor – 2,714 sq ft, 3rd – 5,918 sq ft, Floors are capable of sub-division from 2,500 sq ft"
Why UK ? That is the official reason given in the article above: "It wasn’t our original intention for the UK to become our biggest hub,
but given the price structure and the government support, that is what’s
happened."
Have fun
PS:
Someone here on this subforum wanted an estimate on the cost of the performance capture shoot. We now have a range given the government statement above. Lower limit: 2 million pounds. Upper limit: 15 million pounds.
Taking into account the number of people (salaries) working at Foundry 42 UK, the overhead cost, the cost for equipment etc. my guestimate would be a few (single digit) million pounds .
Banks love to give young adults credit cards. They already have student loans. Let's make them overspend on credit cards to make sure we have a nice system of enslavement through credit. They will be obedient and hard working citizens for their whole life trying to pay off their debt.
I have not bought a game for full price in years. Why? I have a huge backlog and i can wait until they are 50% or more off. I am in no rush.
It cuts a lot deeper than that my friend...
Credit is the only thing that is keeping the machine running. When it runs out.... we're fucked.
Depression.
We had just better hope that our leaders can work together when the proverbial shit hits the fan.
Those 20 million are not for the game, they are an investment in real estate
Interesting ... nowhere in the article it mentions anything about buying real estate. To the contrary ... they are specifically talking about a "multi-million pound performance capture shoot that would qualify for UK video games tax relief"
Furthermore, the office building is not owned by CIG. Never was. They rent the offices. The information about ownership can all be found in the internet (i posted the links previously).
Why UK ? That is the official reason given in the article above: "It wasn’t our original intention for the UK to become our biggest hub,
but given the price structure and the government support, that is what’s
happened."
Have fun
PS:
Someone here on this subforum wanted an estimate on the cost of the performance capture shoot. We now have a range given the government statement above. Lower limit: 2 million pounds. Upper limit: 15 million pounds.
Taking into account the number of people (salaries) working at Foundry 42 UK, the overhead cost, the cost for equipment etc. my guestimate would be a few (single digit) million pounds .
And no where in the part you quoted does it mention buying real estate. Mrsnuffles said an investment.
And you are quoting one small section of the article to try and prove your point. They met to discuss if the performance capture qualifies for the tax relief. Doesn't say if it does/did or not.
In fact the way the article is written it would look like the 15 million so far is invested in the building only from this quote alone "Cloud Imperium has invested around £15 million in its UK business so far. Having started out with one floor of an office building, in 2015 the company took on a second floor and is already planning to expand to a third."
the only part you got right was the quote from Ortwin about the government support.
PS:
No that's you pulling more shit from thin air and trying to pass it off as fact. No where in that article does it say the cost of the performance shoot and like I already mentioned your quote was taken out of context and you left out the first half of it. There is nothing to say they actually received tax relief. Here's the full quote "arranging meetings with important public officials at HMRC and the British Film Institute (BFI) regarding whether a multi-million pound performance capture shoot would qualify for UK video games tax relief"
next time you try and bullshit, maybe don't post an article that contradicts what you are saying.
They've also started to use copy/pasta responses for people saying they're going to do chargebacks since their refunds were denied (Weird since CR said if people didn't support the project that they should get their money back, right?)
quote:
Hi rootdarkarchon,
Thank you very much for your reply.
I am very sorry you felt the need to perform a chargeback, however
chargebacks should only ever be used for cases of genuine fraud, where
you have had no recollection of making the payment yourself. Using a
chargeback as a means to gain a refund is a misuse of the system, and
damages both us, and your own ability to use the payment provider in the
future. Unfortunately if you decide to do this, I will have to take a
note of this down to provide the information to Paypal.
I apologise that we cannot offer you a refund, however as stated by my
colleagues before you are outside of the 14 day grace period and are not
eligible for one. If you require any further assistance please let us
know, thanks.
Best Regards
Amy
Billing Support Representative
Cloud Imperium Games
Pretty scary as that's a straight up lie. A chargeback's sole purpose isn't for fraud (Even though in this case one could argue...). It keeps getting deeper and deeper.
Comments
The part about, "After your initial costs of site purchase and build out, the required expenditures drops substantially", which is still true as your major, up front expenditures will likely be getting the location and building it out. Depending upon the building status when it was purchased/leased, the build out costs can go up or down as structural changes will raise the cost quite a bit. That would be planning, build out of the various offices/divisions, etc etc. Adding building out a third floor of a building won't cost anywhere near what they paid to get the thing open in the first place.
I find it humourous that you would bring up me posting for the LOLs when you're it seems like you're intentionally being daft. Agreeing with goobsnews won't win you any favors as he's essentially proven himself to be just a troll.
Have you had a look at Chris Robert's and Sandi's IMDB Page. It's hilarious!
They list their Crowd funding streams as TV shows! Not kidding here. This guy is clearly delusional.
Executive Producer for the TV Show "Ten for the Chairman". I can't stop laughing!
The Wonderful World of Star Citizen (TV Series) (executive producer - 3 episodes)
The Next Great Starship (TV Series) (executive producer - 16 episodes)
Ten for the Chairman (TV Series) (executive producer - 5 episodes)
Wingman's Hangar (TV Series) (executive producer - 2012-)
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
That was the best Episode, great directing and acting, or was it?
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
IMHO That's why the conversation has stalled.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I really don't understand the Star Citizens. I do like some games and i will defend them but i will also acknowledge their downsides and bugs. I guess some people just can't take a step back and see the bigger picture.
I actually wonder if it is even allowed to post drivel like "10 for the Chairman" as a TV series when in fact it is nothing else but a support video for a private website.
I am going to write IMDB and ask. Would be funny if it got taken down.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
https://goo.gl/JxFV6s
Seems like people are waking up. Be interesting to see how many ban's come down the pipe.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
The hostility in that thread is awesome. One backer wants to walk away from the project and is trying to get CIG to refund their pledge via support and is getting attacked for it lol. I really enjoyed the comment from a backer telling the person wanting a refund who is currently living in South Korea to move to North Korea because they hear they deal with complainers well.
How is it that kids get themselves into a position where they have spent $600 on something they can't even use for several years and for which there is no guarantee that they will actually be able to use?
If you are talking about SC specifically, the answer inevitably would be YES. Why, because they can. They don't need any justification on how to spend the fund, as long as it is used towards making a game.
If you have concerns on how CR is spending the funds, your concern is understandable.
If you are asking whether SC could be make by having 1 team in a building, probably enslaved there for eternity, then only God will have the answer for that. Probably. May be not. No body knows for sure. Lots of opinions.
Some are comparing, creating SC is like going to Mars, which is realy not comparable. Going to Mars requires R&D because we currently does not have the technology for it. At least we are not efficient at it. It could take years, decades, nobody can know for sure, only speculate and hopes. That is why it falls under R&D, the investment is not guaranteed.
Building a business, a game, is not a long term investment. Any business requires RoI that is economically justifiable. Eg. There is little point investing in a product where it would take 10 years to developed and another 10 to get your capital back and another 10 years to make a profit. You have more chance of seeing a profit by putting your money in a bonds (at least you would not die of old age before having the chance of enjoying the profit).
Lets start off with this: "No, my point is that they didn't just go out and drop 20 million on a 20 million dollar building/office" They did go out and over the course of 2 years drop 20 million on this company. No one is saying they dropped 20 million in a day, you are the one being daft here.
Then you imply that I am misrepresenting the facts when I quote this "Cloud Imperium has invested around £15 million in its UK business so far. " and you make it seem like I said 15 MILLION when I quoted a UK press release that showed the amount CIG spent in EUROS. Again, I am not daft because I can read and pay attention. Maybe you should try it.
I find it humerus that anyone who believes himself intelligent would make so many mistakes in his post. You obviously did not read the article being referenced and you totally missed the currency and highlighted it as an issue when really the issue is with you and your comprehension skills.
I have not bought a game for full price in years. Why? I have a huge backlog and i can wait until they are 50% or more off. I am in no rush.
Almost one quarter of the total funds and that is just ONE of 4 Location.
You could pay 170 developers to work on the project for a full year, or 85 for 2 years, or even 43 for 4 years?
I think it is misappropriation of funds, but sadly there is nothing you or me can do about it.
Those 20 million are not for the game, they are an investment in real estate that will still be there as a safety cushion for those in charge if this whole thing turns sideways.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
https://www.gov.uk/government/case-studies/cloud-imperium-games-invests-15-million-in-its-uk-studio
Furthermore, the office building is not owned by CIG. Never was. They rent the offices. The information about ownership can all be found in the internet (i posted the links previously). Currently available "Freedom House .... 2nd foor – 2,714 sq ft, 3rd – 5,918 sq ft, Floors are capable of sub-division from 2,500 sq ft"
Why UK ? That is the official reason given in the article above:
"It wasn’t our original intention for the UK to become our biggest hub, but given the price structure and the government support, that is what’s happened."
Have fun
PS:
Someone here on this subforum wanted an estimate on the cost of the performance capture shoot. We now have a range given the government statement above. Lower limit: 2 million pounds. Upper limit: 15 million pounds.
Taking into account the number of people (salaries) working at Foundry 42 UK, the overhead cost, the cost for equipment etc. my guestimate would be a few (single digit) million pounds .
Credit is the only thing that is keeping the machine running. When it runs out.... we're fucked.
Depression.
We had just better hope that our leaders can work together when the proverbial shit hits the fan.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
And you are quoting one small section of the article to try and prove your point. They met to discuss if the performance capture qualifies for the tax relief. Doesn't say if it does/did or not.
In fact the way the article is written it would look like the 15 million so far is invested in the building only from this quote alone
"Cloud Imperium has invested around £15 million in its UK business so far. Having started out with one floor of an office building, in 2015 the company took on a second floor and is already planning to expand to a third."
the only part you got right was the quote from Ortwin about the government support.
PS:
No that's you pulling more shit from thin air and trying to pass it off as fact. No where in that article does it say the cost of the performance shoot and like I already mentioned your quote was taken out of context and you left out the first half of it. There is nothing to say they actually received tax relief. Here's the full quote
"arranging meetings with important public officials at HMRC and the British Film Institute (BFI) regarding whether a multi-million pound performance capture shoot would qualify for UK video games tax relief"
next time you try and bullshit, maybe don't post an article that contradicts what you are saying.
quote:
Pretty scary as that's a straight up lie. A chargeback's sole purpose isn't for fraud (Even though in this case one could argue...). It keeps getting deeper and deeper.