Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

This is also deeply suspect. Whenever i read about "intangible assets", it makes me think of Narcos....


It certainly is. Paying out a dividend prior to actually delivering a product and officially turning a profit is pretty unusual.

As was the $5mil return on investment paid out in 2020.

They are behaving as if the alpha is a launched product. Makes you ponder ;)

PS welcome to the thread :)
 
Ant, you're priceless......so, after a decade what is the age status of the SC Alpha pray tell?.......early?........pre-pubescent?........pipeline dependent?
Just giving facts you can read by yourself don't make me priceless.
SC is not yet at the status of the Valheim's alpha.
The alpha need at least all core mechanisms in game. SC still lacking some important ones (mainly SM), it's not yet near the beta phase.
Valheim having all of them in game, the game is near the beta status.

You want to call SC a beta in its current state ?
 
Just giving facts you can read by yourself don't make me priceless.
SC is not yet at the status of the Valheim's alpha.
The alpha need at least all core mechanisms in game. SC still lacking some important ones (mainly SM), it's not yet near the beta phase.
Valheim having all of them in game, the game is near the beta status.

You want to call SC a beta in its current state ?
So it is still basically a tech demo? After 400 million and whatever years? But at same time released game? Sounds to me that it is in some kind quantum superposition, depending on stance of observer.
 
Just giving facts you can read by yourself don't make me priceless.
SC is not yet at the status of the Valheim's alpha.
The alpha need at least all core mechanisms in game. SC still lacking some important ones (mainly SM), it's not yet near the beta phase.
Valheim having all of them in game, the game is near the beta status.

You want to call SC a beta in its current state ?

The facts are that you tried to describe Valheim and SC as equally playable. Now you're backtracking, because that's a silly assertion.

No one is asking you to call SC a beta. But acknowledging that it is more akin to a 'pre alpha' would be good. Notably due to its half-built technical underpinnings and long list of of missing features.

If you want another inconvenient fact that distinguishes them though, here's one: At least Valheim didn't charge anyone money for its pre-alpha stage. (Or charge $800 to play as a larger, hairier Viking called Thorir the Troll-Burster, for that matter.)

(And if you want a bonus one, Valheim is also actually fun and functional to play via VR hacks ;))
 
Investors being paid dividends, kinda how investing works but oh well...
Not really. There are several possible sources of return for investors, dividends being just one of them. The thing with dividends is that they can be paid out only in particular circumstances. There was someone here with proper knowledge, investigating it deeper. They said in case of CIG the payment of dividends could be legally justified only due to income from subs. Without those, there would be no legal basis for these payments, at least not from UK companies.


"Your company must not pay out more in dividends than its available profits from current and previous financial years."
 
Last edited:
Yeah, "investors" do get paid dividends. If you generate profit. Btw. are "pledges" now "sales"? Instead of obligations to deliver?
Not really. There are several possible sources of return for investors, dividends being just one of them. The thing with dividends is that they can be paid out only in particular circumstances. There was someone here with proper knowlesge, investigating it deeper. They said in case of CIG the payment of dividends could be legally justified only due to income from subs. Without those, there would be no legal basis for these payments, at least not from UK companies.


"Your company must not pay out more in dividends than its available profits from current and previous financial years."
CIG consider the money gained from game, ship, UEC, cosmetics, subscriptions, etc as revenue from product sales (not pledges). Chris' December 2020 chairman letter has him stating revenue (and paying accounts) many times; pledges none.

Thanks to the sales revenue they make a profit (or loss), following which they've paid out dividends and returns on investment.
 
Not really. There are several possible sources of return for investors, dividends being just one of them. The thing with dividends is that they can be paid out only in particular circumstances. There was someone here with proper knowlesge, investigating it deeper. They said in case of CIG the payment of dividends could be legally justified only due to income from subs. Without those, there would be no legal basis for these payments, at least not from UK companies.

The conclusion of that particular thread was that the subscribers receive their Jump Point magazine, therefore a product had been delivered, therefore a dividend could be defended legally ;)
 
I mean even 110 systems at this stage seems like the project management equivalent to Moses parting the Red Sea.

BUT0ZXG.jpg


Note, not a real quote! This was a series of images made by goons.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
So basically they could just call it quits and show middlefinger to suck...erm "backers"?`And laugh whole way to bank. No obligations at all.
That is certainly how it seems CIG is positioning itself to best defend any eventual legal or regulatory issues. Selling the product as "playable now", applying VAT, declaring profits and paying dividends, CIG customer support explicitly stating the game was already released as Early Access back in 2016, arguing refund lawsuit defenses based around the idea the product is already released etc.

The only ones who do not really seem to have caught on that "the game" may be already released are the backers and the game press at large who still dont dare do any reviews/scoring etc about SC.
 
Back
Top Bottom