Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Mole HD]

The VAT's there because it has to be. CIG ain't a registered charity or whatever, and the pledge line is bumph. They're pre-purchases.

Now if you're saying CIG might define the current ships as delivered products, and so draw a profit semi-legitimately? Like, they could maybe? But that's a road with a bunch of class action law suits at the end of it... And some consumer rights laws raising their eyebrows outside the US.

The Calders are from the music biz, so totally at home with dubious routes to profit, no doubt. But that seems to tip over into 'unwise' territory to me.

I'm sure Microsoft thought exactly the same thing with hindsight

The Calder's investment was under the deliberately loose heading of advertising funds...advertising what I ask you? Two niche genre games mired in the technical hell of pre-production for the last 10 years with no feasible release date for either of them realistically within the next 3 years?

The Calders have had their initial $46m sitting there (officially) since December 2018, the actual investment was made much earlier but not disclosed by Ci~G until December. There's also the further $17m they chucked at Ci~G during 2019/2020, still under the guise of advertising funds...that's a long time waiting for a train don't come

 

[VR Golgot]

I'm sure Microsoft thought exactly the same thing with hindsight

They probably should have had a word with Chris about that cash finding its way to his film adventures

(Think they were just glad to be shot of him at that point though...)

The Calder's investment was under the deliberately loose heading of advertising funds...advertising what I ask you?

At face value: That Squadron game that's coming out next year...

It's still possible that Chris worked his 'pitch man' magic there. (That cast list, those demo reels, that Wing Commander pedigree etc...)

that's a long time waiting for a train don't come

For sure. And doubtless they have either contingency plans, or alternate plans entirely that aren't just 'ride the success wave'.

But if the plan is just creaming ship cash, nobody's ever really voiced a mechanism for how they'd do that legitimately. And I still don't buy the idea that they threw $60m+ at years of future legal headache.

Sitting here in my amateur accountant pants, I just don't see it...

 

[metatheurgist]

You only get lawsuits if people think they're getting ripped. By all accounts (heh) there is an ocean of copacetic whales out there. The Calders have probably taken that into consideration. The whales will probably happily sink to the bottom of the ocean with the CIG Titanic with broad smiles on their faces saying something like "I was part of a once in a lifetime experience".

 

[Viajero]

Just guessing they'd struggle to square it with the ToS...



And broader norms around revenue vs profit.

Our resident retired accountant team figured the dividend would be unlawful if it weren't for the subscription loophole.

I figure any other variant on defining revenue as profit would have to sneak out that same hole, or comparable. (Which rules out cash on the ship-sale scale).

Yeah, that is the thing. All that goes away from the moment SC has been released. And it seems CIG has stated (even if only when pressed for legal reasons) that SC has already indeed released (as early access). CIG would then be making a profit out of an actually sold (early access) product. That legal exchange linked to by Stuart even offers a time for that release: 2016.

As for the ToS, IANAL but the use of “pledge” in its text I reckon is vague enough that any programmed returns to investors could be reasonably argued as part of the also vague and broad “Game Cost”, especially if these are set in stone through investment agreements, and not just discretionary etc.

Also, we are just not privy to the Calders agreement. If there are returns from current sales as part of that agreement, unless backers complain or sue on the basis that their money is being misused then CIG and the Calders can easily get away with it. “Backers will never know”. Dodgey as heck but Chris Roberts, Ortwin etc do not precisely have a stellar ethics track record.

But yeah, if I am wrong and the Calders can not get any returns until the ToS is updated (the dividends given so far are peanuts) or the games are properly released, then they would prolly be extremely upset by now I reckon. 5+ years with no or very little returns for 50+ million would be probably crazy. Hence why I suspect that given the silence they may be getting returns from current sales. Either that or the investment agreement gave them a larger ownership in the project once certain delivery milestones were not met. Or both.

 

[VR Golgot]

All that goes away from the moment SC has been released. And it seems CIG has stated (even if only when pressed for legal reasons) that SC has already indeed released (as early access).

I think it's one thing to make that claim to thwart one individual. Another to make it stick in court if 1000s come looking for you.

But yeah I'll grant you it's possible. Just a risky strategy (no matter how many shell companies you gird yourself in). The Calders have at least one shiny shoe planted in respectable territory. I still think they'd quail a bit at plunging in too deep there.

But yeah, if I am wrong and the Calders can not get any returns until the ToS is updated (the dividends given so far are peanuts) or the games are properly released, then they would prolly be extremely upset by now I reckon. 5+ years with no or very little returns for 50+ million would be probably crazy. Hence why I suspect that given the silence they may be getting returns from current sales. Either that or the investment agreement gave them a larger ownership in the project once certain delivery milestones were not met. Or both.

This is my assumption of where they're at. Pulling every contractual lever they've got, but unable to make dev go any faster as a result (or to capitalise on any extra control they now exert). Still stuck waiting for an official release essentially. (The ~$5m they received in in 2020 is indeed a pittance. The official dividend even more so, as most of it went to Chris. But these are amounts which sit within the 'what can we cream off legitimately' scale. IE the ~$11m Subscriptions + 'Other' funding received in 2020, for example.)

If true, they'll definitely be tearing their hair out right now, for sure. (Will be interesting to see if further money walked out of the company in 2021, once the UK filings & US blog are released.)

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Liabilities recorded due to items presold isn't revenue nor profit, but what keeps the fraudsters from misappropriating the cash and "investing" it or "lending" it, or "spending" it in their ample universe of subsisdiary corps. It's the thing Freyermuth is really good with.

 

[VR Golgot]

Liabilities recorded due to items presold isn't revenue nor profit, but what keeps the fraudsters from misappropriating the cash and "investing" it or "lending" it, or "spending" it in their ample universe of subsisdiary corps. It's the thing Freyermuth is really good with.

o7

Ok, for sure CIG could be walking loads of cash out the back door. (No audited accounts for the US side, shell companies out the wazoo etc)

The things that make me doubt they're doing it at scale are:

• The public claims of ~$500m in liabilities. (Are we saying they've made way more than that, and creamed off the top? Or that it's entirely fictional, and immaterial? [In which case we have to explain the apparent extensive staffing etc])
• The public use of dubious mechanisms to squeeze out semi-legitimate dividends etc. (Why use grey area stuff like that, for a paltry $1m, if you're happy to walk such sums out the door privately and illicitly?)

I just find it unlikely that the Calders have learned CIG are merrily syphoning off the cash illicitly and have bought into that process. (In a big ticker tape parade of investment...)

I'm sure CIG have merrily siphoned off whatever extra they can via grey-scale means. (Paying Chris for the IP rights, etc etc). And that they could go wholesale 'laundromat' at any given point. I just don't reckon that's where they're at currently

 

[Viajero]

I may be wrong but as far as I am aware early access released products are not a liability or pre-purchases. They are fully sold products in their own right (on which you declare revenue and profit as per normal, and eventually dividends etc) just perhaps a bit more crappy in quality and content than other average non early access products, and with no expressed guarantee to get better.

And this is what CIG legal stand seems to be on what SC is since 2016 apparently.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I may be wrong but as far as I am aware early access released products are not a liability or pre-purchases. They are fully sold products in their own right (on which you declare revenue and profit as per normal, and eventually dividends etc) just perhaps a bit more crappy in quality and content than other average non early access products, and with no expressed guarantee to get better.

And this is what CIG legal stand seems to be on what SC is since 2016 apparently.

There is no early access sale when you can't play with the "early asset". How do you imagine selling me early access to an undelivered ship I cannot fly in the game? You have to deliver something for early access. Can't pull the hot air number all the time.

 

[StuartGT]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYqPzE5krH8

https://twitter.com/x/status/1567175831390416898

Source: https://twitter.com/Morphologis/status/1567175831390416898

 

[Viajero]

There is no early access sale when you can't play with the "early asset". How do you imagine selling me early access to an undelivered ship I cannot fly in the game? You have to deliver something for early access. Can't pull the hot air number all the time.

According to CIG the early access release would be with what you can play and is there in the PU now. That is what I meant earlier by "this is it". Literally. You are paying for the access to the PU not for the actual ship. Anything that CIG may decide to add to it later, including a ship, if anything, would be a "bonus". But there is zero obligation for CIG to do it following an early access release.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

There is early access with what you can play and is there in the PU now. That is what I meant earlier by "this is it". Literally. You are paying for the access to the PU not for the actual ship. Anything that CIG may decide to add to it later, if anything, would be a "bonus".

Access to the PU at varying rates? No, they sell ships that aren't there. The PU access isn't worth thousands of dollars when comparable services are much cheaper. Nah.

 

[Viajero]

Access to the PU at varying rates? No, they sell ships that aren't there. The PU access isn't worth thousands of dollars when comparable services are much cheaper. Nah.

CIG just gives you the option to pay more if you want. "Nothing wrong with that".

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

CIG just gives you the option to pay more if you want. "Nothing wrong with that".

They sell ships. The ships aren't in game. It's not a volunteer donation. It's a sale and missing deliveries.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYqPzE5krH8

https://twitter.com/x/status/1567175831390416898

Source: https://twitter.com/Morphologis/status/1567175831390416898

I think I'm done with SC for a while.

He'll be back within a week.

 

[Viajero]

They sell ships. The ships aren't in game. It's not a volunteer donation. It's a sale and missing deliveries.

According to their ToS, CIG says they have zero obligation to deliver any specific items you may think you have paid for. Those same ToS try to make it clear in no uncertain terms that you do not purchase (or pre purchase) anything. If you are lucky the ship you thought you bought may appear in game at some point, or not. No consequences at all for CIG if those ToS are upheld.

You do not purchase anything, you make a pledge towards the development of the Game and the other RSI Services.

Your pledge entitles you to receive the selected in-game items when they are developed and introduced into the Alpha releases of Star Citizen

Which may be never.

you agree that all earned Pledge Funds shall be non-refundable regardless of whether or not RSI is able to complete and deliver the Pledge Item(s)

You are just paying extra for those ships because you want.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

According to their ToS, CIG says they have zero obligation to deliver any specific items you may think you have paid for. Those same ToS try to make it clear in no uncertain terms that you do not purchase (or pre purchase) anything. If you are lucky the ship you thought you bought may appear in game at some point, or not. No consequences at all for CIG if those ToS are upheld.





Which may be never.



You are just paying extra because you want.

Some fluff. You can't waive away legal rights. No matter some scammer may try to make you believe.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

It's not like some corpo ToS is the law we need to abide to, lol. And if I make someone sign a contract to pay me 50 dolares or else ... it just might be how's you say? Void? People just believe too much crap these days. It's like general IQ really went down.

 

[Viajero]

Some fluff. You can't waive away legal rights. No matter some scammer may try to make you believe.

That may be so. I am just trying to show how CIG seems to see SC, and it seems to me they are indeed considering Star Citizen as already released since 2016 (in early access, as per their legal statements). This allows them for exemple to eventually issue dividends and returns to investors and to avoid any liability for any content or features not yet in game that may be never delivered.

This is it. And the usual widespread game reviews would be long overdue. Anything else added to the game would be a bonus because CIG is so kind with us but they have zero obligation. Praise the lord.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

That may be so. I am just trying to show how CIG seems to see SC, and it seems to me they are indeed considering Star Citizen as already released since 2016 (in early access, as per their legal statements). This allows them for exemple to eventually issue dividends and returns to investors and to avoid any liability for any content or features not yet in game that may be never delivered.

This is it. Anythtng else coming to the game would be a bonus because CIG is so kind with us. Praise the lord.

Ah yes, be everything at once. Contradict yourself. Confuse everyone. Make them discuss about nonsense. I think that is the overall strategy.