Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

There's no way I could have guessed the year, but I did expect Chris to do whatever it took to maintain the illusion that he wasn't the biggest failure in the history of game development. Before he lies to anyone else he lies to himself. He lies about how he's competent, he lies about how he's successful, he lies about how his magnum opus is going to revolutionize gaming, he lies about everything. His only talent is self-delusion, of being so convinced by his own bullshit that he comes off as genuine to anyone he needs something from. Those who have already served their purpose are immediately disregarded for the next source of income. Original backers got screwed so that new backers could have previously limited features, older ships were abandoned for new concept sales, and now every backer left is screwed so CIG can enjoy a little more time on life support.

XK posted:

I just want to ask a question about this, to the more knowledgeable financial Goons.

I'm assuming the notes that have to be put in the "Brief description" are legally compelled by some kind of financial disclosure regulation. The specific lines they put in there are required by law from verbatim lists of required disclosures.

If that is true, the one that specifies "all the property or undertaking of the company" is essentially a government required announcement that everything period is on the line.

spacetoaster posted:

So I'm reading through all those documents and I notice that in 2014 all the shares for foundry 42 were owned by Erin Roberts and two other people (who had a smaller amount of shares).

Then there's a document transferring ownership of those shares to cloud imperium games.

I'm assuming that cloud imperium games paid a lot of money for those shares.

Is that how they could be sucking money out of the "game" and getting it legally into their pockets?

Tokamak posted:

The IP has some value, but whether they can sell it for that value is a different matter. Look at 38 Studios for example. The IP was thought to be valued at around $20 million, but at auction they didn't get a high enough offer so it was never sold. I wouldn't be surprised if the bank looked at the money coming in and valued the IP at something like $30 million. The bank went to the trouble of taking ownership of the IP and licensing it back. It is pretty clear that the IP is a large component of the collateral. I can't imagine banks are very good at valuing video game IP. Occasionally banks will gently caress up and offer an arrangement which comes back to bite them in the rear end. This might be one of those cases.

Dementropy posted:

shrach posted:

quote:

MedicineHut posted:
IANAL, (by the way Toast/MoMA is not one either as he is just a poxy paralegal) but by the looks of the documents Schedule 1 suggests CIG UK Ltd / F42 Ltd would retain the Star Citizen (MMO part only?) IP and exploitation/distribution rights (SQ42´s IP seems oddly not specifically excluded from collateral, although the definition of "Game" is missing) while section 4 suggests that they can be charged for any and all of the revenues that may be derived from "the Game" (presumably both SC and SQ42) in order to fulfill the loan obligations.

Knowing which clause supersedes which, in case of conflict, would be great too.

TL;DR: Maybe a loan to finish off SQ42?

I think we've almost solved this now. Someone that is not me (effort) will need to identify a specific clause in there to invoke the IP exclusion.

The only place I see the term, "Excluded Collateral" used is in the definition of "Collateral". So there needs to be an actual clause that is using the specific term "Collateral".

If the word / term "Collateral" does not appear anywhere in any of the clauses, the definition of the term is irrelevant, whatever they might have been trying to do. An idea of what might be in there somewhere would be something like:

42. The Chargor pinky swears not to try any sneaky take backsies with regard to any of the collateral mentioned in sections 4 and 5.

Michaellaneous posted:

To make this a bit easier on people who are confused:

Base Rate is a rate set by the Bank of England for loans to other banks. Interest rates are usually based on this.
Margin is a percentage in which the actual interest rate can fluctuate over a year, based on findings by the bank, etc.

The actual Interest Rate for CIG is in no way either 0.25% or 2%. It is 2.25% + Interest Rate for this loan. The actual amount is undisclosed but large businesses loans are usually between 5 and 10% + Margin and Base Rate.

shrach posted:

I mean you could maybe argue it's worse. So I think this is the relevant section for the context:



The way I read this is that once CIG pays off the loan, all the collateral is returned to them. But since collateral excludes the IP, it's saying that the IP is not returned to CIG even when they pay off the loan. I dunno.

Xaerael posted:

If the rabid defence that's been going on doesn't prove that the "vocal" fans are either staff/paid shills or amongst the stupidest people on the planet, I don't think anything will.

It's a bailout. The tank is empty. When I took out my starter loan back a few years ago to get my business going, there was nothing like these terms. A loan like this is a signal that insolvency is a present and looming threat.

his nibs posted:

Nicholas posted:

how are people so stupid to think that any bank is going to hand out a million+ dollar loan at a lower interest rate than what you'd make from a free checking account

Nicholas posted:

how are people so stupid to think that any bank is going to hand out a million+ dollar loan at a lower interest rate than what you'd make from a free checking account

TheAgent posted:

the gray market is dumping their prices by another 25 to 40%

anyone with half a brain will demand a refund and get the gently caress out before it's too late

peter gabriel posted:

No, you see, this is how it works:

A bank gives you a loan, and you keep that money in the account and it makes more in interest than you pay in interest

In this way CIG are being really clever, you see the money makes more money, it's like a perpetual motion machine but for money. Other businesses don't do this because Chris is a visionary and no one else though of it.

Nicholas posted:

its so fundamentally stupid only someone in deep denial about being scammed could continue to believe it.

Gumbel2Gumbel posted:

It's just bizarre that they think these brilliant moneymaking schemes 1) are so obvious that they understand them from looking at this document 2) are so easy to pull off 3) the bank themselves would be unaware of this scheme and not get in on it

A Neurotic Corncob posted:

this owns

peter gabriel posted:

I'm picturing the bank manager going as he begrudgingly hands over piles of cash to CIG mumbling 'dammit you guys got us real good' through clenched teeth

D_Smart posted:

LOL!! This clown is emailing the bank, instead of Chris Roberts. He thinks Coutts are going to divulge private info about a client?

just emailed coutts to clear up the misinfo about star citizen kickstater

peter gabriel posted:

I'm picturing the bank manager going as he begrudgingly hands over piles of cash to CIG mumbling 'dammit you guys got us real good' through clenched teeth

Decrepus posted:

Chris Roberts took a 0.25% interest loan from the bank and then bought their Certificates of Deposit with a 1.00% rate. He has in effect created an infinite money loop.

I have over 14 years experience as a morrowind alchemist finance manager.

Decrepus posted:

Chris Roberts took a 0.25% interest loan from the bank and then bought their Certificates of Deposit with a 1.00% rate. He has in effect created an infinite money loop.

I have over 14 years experience as a morrowind alchemist finance manager.

Colostomy Bag posted:

Ben Lesnick, Negotiator probably brokered the deal.

Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

Would anyone be surprised if CIG's crack legal team missed that and inadvertently put up the whole company by accident?

shrach posted:

Once Chris burns through infinite money doing mocap of guys with mops though he can just licence the investment algorithm to other banks and make some more money to continue the mocap.

Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

Would anyone be surprised if CIG's crack legal team missed that and inadvertently put up the whole company by accident?

peter gabriel posted:

One of the mocap sessions was of people making new money, so once again Chris's vision pays off

serious norman posted:

is the game out yet

serious norman posted:

is the game out yet