|
big nipples big life posted:To bank with Coutts you must have at least £1,000,000 in tangible assets and in any event they are selective about their clientele; which implies CIG is doing well. Sure is a good thing they got all that airplane furniture, or they might not have been able to secure an emergency lifejacket loan!
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
big nipples big life posted:To bank with Coutts you must have at least £1,000,000 in tangible assets and in any event they are selective about their clientele; which implies CIG is doing well. This actually raises an interesting point. Coutts & Co isn't really a bank to business, but a bank to high net worth individuals. How much you wanna bet Croberts' personal assets are also on the line...?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Another Friday/weekend disaster for CIG. This dumpster fire is raging more than ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:47
|
|
C-Bangin' it 
|
Everyone calm down Chris said more money means we get the game sooner!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
big nipples big life posted:To bank with Coutts you must have at least £1,000,000 in tangible assets and in any event they are selective about their clientele; which implies CIG is doing well. Chris is an expert at making people think he's better off than he actually is. After Microsoft, Kevin Costner, and hundreds of thousands of nerds does anyone think a bank has a chance?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
Wasn't Chris basically couch surfing before SC's kickstarter took off?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
Does anyone else think this is just a short-term loan to get them through to the release of "3.0"? They probably figure to repay it with huge whale revenues from Gamescom, Citcon, and the anniversary and holiday sales.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
CrazyTolradi posted:Wasn't Chris basically couch surfing before SC's kickstarter took off? He was suckin' dicks out behind the Circle K is what I heard
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
This is good for Bitcoin
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
It's extremely good that a company we gave 150 million dollars to has at least a million pounds of assets
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
big nipples big life posted:It's extremely good that a company we gave 150 million dollars to has at least a million pounds of assets Well, between the mocap rigs, furniture, and the company Porsche that's a million easy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
MinorInconvenience posted:This actually raises an interesting point. Coutts & Co isn't really a bank to business, but a bank to high net worth individuals. How much you wanna bet Croberts' personal assets are also on the line...? This is a personal loan for Star Citizen, the horse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
big nipples big life posted:It's extremely good that a company we gave 150 million dollars to has at least a million pounds of assets 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
All the money is going into the game. The game that saves PC gaming is worth millions. No. Billions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
Maybe CIG just has a gambling problem?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
boviscopophobic posted:Does anyone else think this is just a short-term loan to get them through to the release of "3.0"? They probably figure to repay it with huge whale revenues from Gamescom, Citcon, and the anniversary and holiday sales. There is something to this idea when you consider a single year. I think fundraising year to date is about $11m? And they probably expect to raise ~$36m each year. I think in the previous year the six month split was something like 12/24m in the two halves. The problem is when you consider multiple years. To get into a position where they would need a working capital loan. If you have revenue of $36m per year and you had reserves that are now depleted, you must be spending more than that. If a loan was a genuinely good idea, why wait until "x" years in before getting the loan? How much backer money are they happy to spend on servicing the borrowing? If you're scrambling for good news, it would be that this will prolong the eventual collapse somewhat. However, when the collapse comes it will be harder to dream about the community finishing the project with all the code and assets released into the wild, since it will all belong to the bank. There's also the hilarious possibility of a rogue indie developer buying the whole lot from Coutts for a fiver.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
shrach posted:There's also the hilarious possibility of a rogue indie warlord buying the whole lot from Coutts for a fiver. ftfy
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
quote:I wonder if they plan to buy the imaginarium, where they filmed all the SQ42 scenes. I think it went bankrupt a couple of months ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
heh it's a good thread
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:40
|
|
Welcome to the
|
Why the gently caress do these idiots see Crobblers as someone that businesses and celebrities will bend over backwards to help out just for a chance to kiss his ring? He has zero charisma, looks like a flaccid cock and the voice of a muppet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
shrach posted:So it seems they ran out of money. But there is a good news. CIG uk has taken out a (presumably) big old loan, which you can take a look at on their filing. They have split the terms with F42 so you can read it in their filing too. The collateral for the loan? Everything. All game rights, recordings they've made including music, future tax credits, any insurance policies they've taken out. Any agreements they've made with anyone else (sponsors, membership fees). It's section 4 / 5. This is good for Star Citizen
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
Inkel posted:
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Breetai posted:This is legitimately the biggest blow to SC since the evaporation of SQ42 prelude's release last year and the Spectrum-focussed convention. The fuckwit who green lit the loan knows that one way or the other, he's getting his money back plus a load on top, may not be in pure exchangable currency form, but he will at least have some really nice office furniture at the end. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
Redditors loosing their poo poo is never not funny
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
I support the idea of them mortgaging their entire jpeg warehouse to buy a mocap kindergarten for chris
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
 I'm the real villain here. I need to check my email less often. I'm also sorry that Derek got dragged into at the end there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
shrach posted:There is something to this idea when you consider a single year. I think fundraising year to date is about $11m? And they probably expect to raise ~$36m each year. I think in the previous year the six month split was something like 12/24m in the two halves. The problem is when you consider multiple years. To get into a position where they would need a working capital loan. If you have revenue of $36m per year and you had reserves that are now depleted, you must be spending more than that. Well, the loan doesn't need to be a good idea in the long term. If I were a banker (I am not one and I know nothing about banking development), I would view SC's long term prospects as pretty uncertain -- no demonstrated revenue growth and troubled development -- so I wouldn't lend out, say, another $150M and rely on SC's commercial release to see a return. However, for the moment whales are still happy to spend and CIG has a proven track record of bringing in money in the second half of each year. So I figure this is more likely the equivalent of a payday loan, possibly with extortionate interest rates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
"Why do we owe the bank only 5 million? I want to owe them 100 million!" -Cannon Films https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm5TSJhrshs&t=5072s
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
So, if the game now defaults and folds any and all remaining cash and assets would be due to the creditor first, correct? Does it seem plausible that they would secure this loan to provide a very convenient excuse as to not issue refunds and deal with backers when the whole thing comes crashing down? I assume all the individuals will be protected and only the company itself will hold any liability? Seems like it would be very easy to just walk away, wash your hands of the whole affair, and give the excuse that "We tried our best!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
 Archiving for posterity
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
He's more of a shotgun than a catapult tbh http://i.imgur.com/pRup3pN.mp4 big nipples big life fucked around with this message at 16:31 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Its obvious that they must be running red for a few years given that they spend 20+ million on probably the most efficient of their studios. If all other studios combined had a similar burn rate then they'd still be super red, and we know that LA runs way hotter than the other ones. Really, it wont be long till something comes up that they have 10m on hand, a burn rate of close to 4m a month and 18m in debt. Then all the praises the developers praises for the community will go down the shitter as they get stuck in the pain/anger stage of grief.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
MinorInconvenience posted:This actually raises an interesting point. Coutts & Co isn't really a bank to business, but a bank to high net worth individuals. How much you wanna bet Croberts' personal assets are also on the line...? He's so distracted flying first class between studios yelling at interns about leather jackets they can probably get him to sign whatever they want.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
No, Ben is an island.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Behold this first return on investment for the savvy financiers at Coutts & Co!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
I'm JUST SO PUMPED FOR ANOTHER SPEEDER BIKE!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
boviscopophobic posted:Well, the loan doesn't need to be a good idea in the long term. If I were a banker (I am not one and I know nothing about banking development), I would view SC's long term prospects as pretty uncertain -- no demonstrated revenue growth and troubled development -- so I wouldn't lend out, say, another $150M and rely on SC's commercial release to see a return. However, for the moment whales are still happy to spend and CIG has a proven track record of bringing in money in the second half of each year. So I figure this is more likely the equivalent of a payday loan, possibly with extortionate interest rates. There's a good hypothetical question in here somewhere. While both of these scenarios are undoubtedly good for Star Citizen, which is better? 1. They've run out of money and just need a small sized loan to bridge a short-term funding gap. 2. They've run out of money and have successfully secured a large loan that ensures the company has enough funding to cover the shortfall for a few more years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
IncredibleIgloo posted:So, if the game now defaults and folds any and all remaining cash and assets would be due to the creditor first, correct? Does it seem plausible that they would secure this loan to provide a very convenient excuse as to not issue refunds and deal with backers when the whole thing comes crashing down? I assume all the individuals will be protected and only the company itself will hold any liability? Seems like it would be very easy to just walk away, wash your hands of the whole affair, and give the excuse that "We tried our best!" If there is a default and the bank demands to see the books, you can literally go from a Friday AtV video saying everything is okay to doors padlocked on Monday and the employees locked out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:36
|
|
